Corrosion Resistance test...failed

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-01-2009 14:56

Well Jim, I certainly will not beat you up!!! However I cannot speak the same for my Freund Nanjing or 3.? because anything is possible for those two "crispy critters!!! ;) ;) ;) " I will say this, you certainly have a good point in mentioning this as well as being previously mentioned earlier in the thread by jarcher first as well as by myself also, although not included within the shielding gas as well which is also another good point... ;)

Now as far as the filler is concerned, the FCAW filler is the appropriate for this version of Alloy 2205 grade of Duplex with a UNS number designated S31803... You are correct in observing that the filler used for the root pass welded with a different process (GTAW or TIG) compared to the Flux Cored welding filler metal is unusual at best, yet I believe that the rationale behind this choice was to use a root filler with a different process that would enhance ductility as well as corrosion resistance in the root of the weld... So, please let me elaborate further if I may...

A region of special concern in welding duplex Stainless Steel of this grade for use in the as welded condition is the highly diluted root pass. Since a considerable fraction of the root pass will be made up of the lower nickel percentage base metal, it's overall nickel content will be less than that of the undiluted weld metal if 2209 were to be used for the root pass. Thus the higher ferrite root pass will have lower ductility than the rest of the weld... To deal with this concern, it was probably felt by the welding engineer for this project that it would be useful to employ filler metal with a built in "Ferrite Cushion" if you will, in the form of somewhat more nickel than the bare minimum needed to hold all-weld metal ferrite levels low enough for good ductility.

Then the diluted root areas, or mass can be ductile in the as-welded condition, particularly if reasonable precautions are taken to avoid excessive dilution and one way to avoid that would be to design the joint geometry in such a way to avoid feather edges. A tight root will result in more dilution than an open root with a land and employing a "U' groove would also minimize residual sresses in the root pass as well. ;) So that is more than likely the rationale behind the decision to weld the joint in question in this manner, and if the WPS was qualified previously, then it must have been successful in using this method despite it being unusual today when compared to it's more widespread use almost thiry or more years ago. ;)

However, just as jarcher, myself, and you mentioned earlier... the use of Ni in the purging gas ,as well as you mentioning to include it into the shielding gas as well, probably would have been more beneficial in avoiding the potential problems unforeseen by the EOR when he, or she decided to employ my previously mentioned rationale for using the different grade of GTAW filler for the root pass only!!! ;) ;) ;) Then there is the possibility that because the pickling solution used which btw, is not required as part of the ASTM G49-03 Method A pitting corrosion test may have also contributed to such significant weight/mass loss in the sample after the ASTM G48=03 method A test was performed due to inadequate quality controls employed in order to make sure that any weight/mass loss would have also been recorded and noted prior to employing the pitting corrosion test on the sample.

So in summary, without knowing all of the particular as well as specific steps taken throughout every step prior to welding, during welding and after welding, to the monitoring of each and every step in preparing, cleaning & pickling which again was not required as well as monitoring the method A version of administering the required pitting corrosion test, we can only speculate what really caused this test to fail because it was the only one of the required tests that failed out of all the tests which were required for this qualification. I hope this puts this thread in a better perspective in order for you to understand it better now! ;)

Respectfully,
Henry

By Nanjing Date 11-02-2009 12:28 Edited 11-02-2009 12:38

Henry and Mr Archer and any other armchair detectives out there (by experience?), have a look at this Lincoln website for test temperatures for this welding consumable. http://www.metrode.com/docs/products/DuplexTP.pdf. Henry 40C! you still have not answered me! Straight answer this time... no more chances... every one is waiting!!! Can you expect a weight loss below 4 at 40 with 22%Cr? I never read what u write fully as it is too long and it is hard to follow due to the grammar but I take it that 3.2 inspector has (3.2 u need to get a life if u read every post from Henry!) No offence meant!.

It just does not work, even welding with a 25% Cr super duplex filler you should not test near 40C if you must consider wight loss, a novice should know this, acceptance criteria could have been based on "no pitting on internal surface" with a description on how the test surface was investigated (Sharp pin etc)without considering weight loss. BTW how do you get Ni into the Argon? I always thought it was nitrogen!

More drivel.

By 3.2 Inspector (***)

Date 11-02-2009 12:32

Naaaahhh, Henry is on ignore but whenever I need a good laugh, I "un-ignore" him.
I agree, it is impossible to get a straight answer from him, he always just refer to some articles he has found on the www.

3.2

By Nanjing Date 11-02-2009 12:45

have u any experience in corrosion testing 3.2?

By 3.2 Inspector (***)

Date 11-02-2009 13:07

Limited, I "only" make the procedures and hand the coupon to a testing lab.
The only time I had problems with super duplex was due to Cr depletion because of the cap being welded with to little filler.

3.2

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-02-2009 22:40

Then you must not understand my answer because I didn't use the World Wide Web for it 3.?... Btw, I also have you on "Ignore" so, who is really amusing who here??? You know 3.?, when i decided that the word "CLOWN" was an excellent nickname for you as opposed to the one you chose which is "Slim Shady?" or something to that effect... I never realized how perfect the nickname I chose for you fits you as well as it does!!! :) :) :) ROTFLMFAO!!! :) :) :) Auf Wiedersehen Clown, err - I mean 3.? ROTFLMFAOA!!! :) :) :)

Nanjing ought to be ashamed of himself associating himself to such a proud city in China!!! Maybe it's because he's fro mthere??? Hmmmm, that would explain a whole lot!!! ;) ;) ;) Now your nickname is aptly "OBTUSE" which fits you like a glove!!! ROTFLMFAOAAA!!!!! :) :) :) :) Nanjing! You need to cool yourself off by taking a dip into the Yangtze so you can yourself offfrom getting all hot and excited from conversing with me!!! :) :) :)

Henry

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-02-2009 19:37 Edited 11-02-2009 19:56

nanjing, nanjing, nanjing!

Good question on the Ni... Finally!!! You're using your eyes much better!!! Must have been something I wrote earlier??? Well, I must have mistyped!!! Don't tell me that you do not know what is a "typo" either now Nanjing??? My "speeling" (Intentionally misspelled this time!) isn't as perfect as it used to be, but if you're resorting to that line of questioning, then it's pointless to even consider continuing a conversation with your sorry a$$!!! You have my answer already in this thread, and if it's too long??? Well, TOO FRIGGIN BAD!!!

I'm saying it again as I said it before, I'M DONE WITH THIS CHILDISH DISCUSSION!!! You have turned this intentionally into a mess because of your own denial of being "caught with your pants on fire" so, it doesn't surprise me that you would still continue to spew out more and more drivel (I'll use your phrase this time in the hope that you'll understand better! ;) ) intentionally!!! ;) :) :)

May I suggest that you take a vacation to clear your mind of such huge amounts of MALE BOVINE EXCREMENT!!! Talk about someone spewing out more drivel Nanjing??? Too bad it is you that's posting it as well as not checking to see if the link you posted works as well because it doesn't... And speaking of links... Do not challenge me into citing my information based on links alone because nanjing? You do not have chance in anywhere if you want to resort exclusively to that, because I will BURY YOU with so many links with relevant empirical data that you will die before you get to read even a fraction of it all - CAPECHE???

In fact, I intentionally decided against using more web links to cite my writing because there is no way that you could have finished reading all of the links I could have easily posted if I wanted to, and now that you have admitted to all of us of your obvious learning impediment, it does seem to make sense now why you're having so much trouble understanding me at all nanjing! Well, I was always told that "if you can't take the heat, then get out of THE KITCHEN!!!" ROTFLMFAO!!! :) :) :)

And now you're turning on 3.? also??? How pathetic!!! nanjing! You are a really losing your sense of reality here!!! May I strongly suggest that you go on a vacation so that you can avoid having what reads like a ominous nervous breakdown!!! ROTFLMFAO!!! :) :) :) Armchair??? Well then nanjing! If you're not sitting on a chair also when you participate in this forum, then I dare ask just exactly what it is that you are sitting on when you not only make a such lousy conversation, but when you attempt to read the responses posted by myself and the rest also??? Is it that uncomfortable for you to sit in to patiently read all of the paragraphs in our posts??? Well, then you have answered the root of your own problem nanjing!!! You hate knowing that you do not have an armchair to sit on, much less a leg to stand on that is, unless you only have one leg to stand on if at all!!! ROTFLMFAO!!! ;) :) :) However, if you lost a leg, or both of them due to combat or a serious traffic accident, then my deepest sympathies, and may I suggest that you sue the Doctors because they should have amputated the portion of your brain which is the source and cause of your dysfunction!!! :) :) :) SOTFLMFAO!!! :) :) :) :) :)

You call yourself an engineer??? Then explain to me why it is so difficult for you to read my posts since real engineers read much more data as well as detailed reports as part of their job description unless that is, you are also having trouble keeping your eyes focused for such an extended period of time??? Hmmmm.... It sure darn makes sense to me and the rest who are reading your responses in this thread! ;) Go on vacation nanjing!!! You do really need one for you own mental fitness. ;) In the mean time, learn how to post a web link on this forum correctly by verifying that it does work with the use of another tab on your browser so you don't continue to make a fool out of yourself!!! :) ;) ;) ROTFLMFAO!!! :) :) :) :) :) Don't ell me that you forgot how to learn??? Because If this is the problem with you, then FOLKS??? I REST MY CASE!!! :) :) :)

Your Dear Freund,
Henry

By Nanjing Date 11-02-2009 22:13

Dear Henry, 40C! Answer please!

By Jim Hughes (***)

Date 11-04-2009 23:53

Sorry Nanjing,
It was a (by experience?) typo. I ment nitrogen. Not to impart more drivel, but would a ASTM A923 test be a better fit for original posts application?

Jim

By Nanjing Date 10-28-2009 22:22 Edited 10-28-2009 22:35

Where exactly did the pitting occur? Edges are an inherent problem and end grain attack. Also was it on the weld metal, HAZ or base metal? What was the welding process (FCAW can be a problem especially at 40C- 35C is the norm for this weld metal). What consumable did you use and what was the UNS number of the base material. What was the base metal thickness (150C interpass maybe too high on thin sections and what was your welding heat input in kj/mm. Did you check the phase balance cap and root for weld metal and HAZ? I take it that it is 25% Cr super duplex not standard 22% Cr you do not say! Was the sample checked for sigma phase precipitation. Finally is the lab experienced in doing these tests.

By JTMcC

Date 11-02-2009 20:37

Wow.

JTMcC

By welder5354 (**)

Date 11-02-2009 23:50

Well tomorrow, i'll be doing a retest for that Duplex material, but only for the corrosion test.
I have to say, it has been an interesting argument from everybody who gave their
2 cents worth. So i'll report back within two weeks when i get my results.
One question; Would it be worth while to use pickling paste after the weld in complete,
to clean any discolouration from the HAZ.

By Shane Feder (****)

Date 11-02-2009 23:52

[deleted]

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-03-2009 00:40 Edited 11-03-2009 00:47

[deleted]

By Shane Feder (****)

Date 11-03-2009 01:03

[deleted]

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-03-2009 01:27 Edited 11-03-2009 19:53

[deleted]

By Nanjing Date 11-03-2009 10:58

Henry, we are all still waiting, 40C... u just keep avoiding the question... Would you put your house on testing 22%Cr at this temperature? Give me a simple yes or no answer. Could not connect to the link because it has a dot at the end?

By 3.2 Inspector (***)

Date 11-03-2009 11:22

[deleted]

By jarcher (**)

Date 11-03-2009 11:40

Here's something else of interest:

It may be that Norsok M601 is being misapplied to 22% Cr. Norsok on corrosion testing:

4.3.5 Corrosion testing
Welds in stainless steels Type 6Mo, Type 25Cr duplex and nickel based alloys shall be corrosion tested according to ASTM G 48, Method A. The test temperature shall be 40 ºC and the exposure time shall be minimum 24 h.
The test specimen shall have a dimension of full wall thickness by 25 mm along the weld and 50 mm across the weld. The test shall expose the external and internal surface and a cross section surface including the weld zone in full wall thickness. Cut edges shall be prepared according to ASTM G48. The whole specimen shall be pickled before being weighed and tested. Pickling may be performed for 5 min at 60 °C in a solution of 20 % HNO3 + 5 % HF.
The acceptance criteria are as follows:
• there shall be no pitting at 20 X magnification;
• the weight loss shall not exceed 4,0 g/m2.
4.3.6 Micro-structural examination
Type 22 and 25Cr duplex stainless steel shall be examined and the test samples shall comprise a cross section of the weld metal, HAZ and the base metal of the pipe. The micro-structure shall be suitably etched and examined at 400X magnification and shall have grain boundary with no continuous precipitations and the inter-metallic phases, nitrides and carbides shall not in total exceed 0,5 %.
For the stainless steel Type 22 and 25Cr duplex the ferrite content in the weld metal root and in the last bead of the weld cap shall be determined in accordance with ASTM E 562 and shall be in the range of 30 % to
70 %

Notice that type 25 is listed under the 40C criteria, but not type 22. There doesn't seem to be a corrosion test called for type 22 in Norsok, or am I going blind too?

By Nanjing Date 11-03-2009 12:04

jarcher, of course it is being missapplied this has to be done only for the 6% Mo and superduplex which should stand up to the 40C test. For 22%Cr you only need to do a microexamination to check for precipitation of any deleterious third phase and check the phase balance in accordance with E562.

I hope u had a look at the data I attached from Metrode (who are now part of Lincoln). I am not plugging them but they are excellent and have helped me so much over the years, in many countries, with their technical expertise in welding the higher alloyed stainless steels.

By jarcher (**)

Date 11-03-2009 13:03 Edited 11-03-2009 13:05

I did look at the Metrode, very nice source of information from all appearances, thanks for posting it. The point of my post was more for Welder5354, although it was tacked on to yours. He needs to determine where Norsok is being misapplied (his company, the lab, the customer?) and have things set aright. He's already, according to his account, passed the test for 2205, because the corrosion test was not required according to the quoted specification. If the customer is misapplying the spec, then his QC or Engineering need to get back to the customer to find out what they really want. If the misapplication is at his company or the lab, the test has already met the requirements and the corrosion data can just be ignored.

By G.S.Crisi (****)

Date 11-03-2009 20:25

I've got ASTM G 48 before me.
Paragraph 5.2.1 of Method A says "Suitable temperature for evaluation are 22 +- 2ºC and 50 +- 2ºC.
Paragraph 6.2.1 of Method B says exactly the same.
Let's make a few considerations. Prima facie, as Romans said (i.e., first thinking that comes to your mind) it is possible to run an ASTM G 48 test at 40 ºC on a 22% Chrome alloy, even more taking into account that, first, 6% ferric chloride is a weak corrosive agent, and second, that 40 ºC (104 ºF) is far from being a high temperature, being about the temperature of the shower we take every day. Of course, corrosion at 50 ºC will be a little bit higher than at 22º C, but just a little.
BUT ...........
1. But standard ASTM G 48 title says that it applies to "Stainless steels and related alloys". AISI 410, with 12% chrome, is a stainless steel; and 22% chrome is a stainless alloy; so both of them are included in ASTM G 48, but obviously they behave differently when faced to the same corrosive agent. Conclusion: G 48 is a broad specification that doesn't look at particular cases. Particular cases should be taken into account separately.
2. The Metrode data sheet attached to nanjing posting leaves little doubt (actually, no doubt) that, in fact, 22% chrome alloy behaves differently when submitted to G 48 test at 22 or 40 º C temperature. Why? I confess I don't know. Along my life, when I didn't know something I asked the one who knew it. In this case, I'll get in touch with Metrode and ask them.
Giovanni S. Crisi

Message to nanjing: Thanks for your kindness, but don't call me Doctor for I'm not one. I'm just a B.S in Chemical Engineering.

By Nanjing Date 11-03-2009 23:05

[deleted]

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-03-2009 23:34

[deleted]

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-04-2009 01:11

Just to add, and this will be my final post on this thread... Here is a link which I at first did not want to post because after all. I was accused of being someone who only posts answers from links only and one must read them in order to find hte answer... Well here's a link that verifies what Giovanni has already posted and this is from Sandvik, the same manufacturer that I used to inform nanjing of his missing the exact UNS # posted by the OP in this thread so, here is the link:

http://www.sandvik.com/sandvik/0140/internet/se01659.nsf/HandbookWeb/4D2F725116DAD2ABC1256B490043561E

Here's another one on Seamless Pipe & Tubing:

http://www.sandvik.com/sandvik/0140/internet/se01598.nsf/0/98a6da5240941baf41256618006f4439!OpenDocument&Click=

Now I could have referred to these links earlier, but I decided to answer the questions myself with my own words!!! ;) this link cerainly covers the pitting corrosion test in much greater detail than the Metrode link could, so there you have it - Case Closed!!! :) :) :) Like I said before, this is my last post in this thread regardless of who responds, so don't even bother with waiting on a response because you will not get one from me!!! ;)

Henry

By Nanjing Date 11-04-2009 10:38 Edited 11-04-2009 11:20

Henry, the link you provide is for the base material which is solution annealed (along with any seam welds!)

Do you not know the difference in corrosion properties of the base material and the weld metal in the AS-WELDED condition????? Metrode sell welding consumables for welding duplex.... they do not sell duplex pipe!

I hope this is your last post on this before you embarrass yourself any further if that is at all possible! I think every one will now have the measure of you and will treat any advice you give on welding these materials in future with well-founded caution.

By G.S.Crisi (****)

Date 11-05-2009 23:25

To day, November 5, I've sent a letter to Metrode Ltd. asking why a 22% Chrome base metal, when welded with Zeron 100X and using pure argon as shielding gas, can be tested according to ASTM G48 up to a temperature of 30ºC, as shown on their Data Sheet posted by Nanjing, if:
a) G48 itself says that the test can be run at 22 and 50ºC.
b) 6% ferric chloride is a weak corrosive agent.
On my posting dated November 3, I said I was going to do that.
I'll let you all people know what Metrode answer is.
Giovanni S. Crisi

By welder5354 (**)

Date 11-06-2009 02:35

Jarcher, i took notice of what you said in one of your memos regarding the duplex pipe.
You were right on, there is nothing there that states anything about corrosion on duplex (22%).
I told that to my boss today, so he checked the criteria closely and sure enought we have wasted our time
trying to do a corrosion test on duplex procedure. He was going to make a call to the offshore to verfy what you
were saying.
Thanks guys for all that info.

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-06-2009 06:24 Edited 11-07-2009 17:07

Let's look at the Metrode chart again...

Then we have this...

By Nanjing (**) Date 10-31-2009 01:55

"Henry, dear friend, you still not have not responded to my repeated question. With your vast experience in welding do you consider testing 22%Cr weld metal at 40C acceptable and a normal industry practice?

Please no more rants. Welder 5354 has asked for help and you have become preoccupied with UNS numbers for some reason. Help welder 5354. Tell him if it is ok to use 22%Cr filler in a 40C G48 test and that the problem lies elsewhere. I note everyone else who originally commented on this has kept their heads down. How about you DR Crisi? What is your opinion? Do you recommend testing this filler at this temperature? I feel sorry for welder 5354 who came on here looking for some help and this thread has degenerated into Henry's insecurity about not having a degree and having a liver transplant and basically trying to cover up the real issue that he did not see that the problem was with with the filler wire selection for the test temperature. By the way Henry I do not drink too much... I spill most of it."

Pretty pathetic don't you think??? I say this because I never disagreed with him on the 40 degrees C temp as I say so in this post:

By ssbn727 (****) Date 10-30-2009 01:24

"Nanjing!

I already explained to you why they specified the 25% Cr root pass, and i'll quote it once again... Quote:

By ssbn727 (****) Date 10-28-2009 22:38

"This is more than likely one of your probable culprits the root pass deposit of the ER 2594 (100X) using GTAW...Now I don't know the exact chemical composition of the root pass filler but if there was an insufficient amount of nickel necessary in order to hold the all weld metal ferrite levels low enough for good ductility the conditions as such would certainly be enough to warrant enough IGSCC (Inter-Granular Stress Corrosion Cracking) throughout the thickness of almost the entire weld metal deposit passes to cause enough corrosion and show the pitting marks as well, because if the base/parent metal has a 5 to 6% Nickel content and the root filler doesn't have at least an 8 to 10% of Nickel in order to keep the ferrite number low enough to avoid brittle fracture due to IGSCC that is, so long as excessive dilution is avoided, then IGSCC can originate where the first pass of the flux cored deposit of Supercore (E2209TO/1-4) diluted, and more than likely excessively with the root pass made up of an alloy mix with insufficient Nickel. this is one of many probabilities however slim it may be, I'm leaning more towards excessive dilution due to the higher heat input from the FCAW process... So the next questions would be: What were the parameters used in welding with the FCAW process, and what were the parameters for the GTAW process and finally, what was the exact composition of purging gas used - NOT the shielding gas!!!

I ask this because if there wasn't a slight amount of Nitrogen added to the purging gas this could also have led to setting up the conditions for IGSCC as well as having too many ppm's of oxygen in the purging gas, not the shielding gas!!!

In summary, if there isn't sufficient data bought forth for us to analyze completely to cover all possible scenarios by having all of the pertinent information available to review, then we could come up with all types of possible root causes that may or may not bear fruit with or without complete confidence!"

Then you have the audacity to say this:

"If you read my posts I never said the base material was super duplex."

Well then what the heck is this???

By Nanjing (**) Date 10-28-2009 18:22 Edited 10-28-2009 18:35 Quote:

"I take it that it is 25% Cr super duplex not standard 22% Cr you do not say."

This is when I referred to the original poster's first post on this thread, and btw, the time lines do not lie so, please do not take me for a fool because you'll find yourself caught with your pants on fire if you dare underestimate my powers of understanding how these threads and posts work!!!

Look, I do not disagree with what you think is the probable root cause of why the pitting marks occurred, I just disagree with your blanket statement that the only UNS number for grade 2205 duplex stainless steel is only S32205 because it is clear that I proved not only to you, but to anyone else who wants to notice that there is more than one UNS number for Grade 2205 Duplex Stainless steel which is both S32205 and S31803 as well yet you still fail to agree with me and hold your ground that there is only one UNS number for 2205 grade Duplex stainless steel despite the overwhelming proof I have provided compared to nothing that you have put up so far to counter my assertion. And that is the main reason that you make yourself look so ignorant like a horse with blinders on!!!

Finally I agree if there isn't sufficient Nitrogen or Nickel to keep the ferrite level from rising substantially enough to disrupt the phase balance which is why they probably used the 25% Cr GTAW filler for the root as well as the process in order to control dilution as well as to deposit more Nickel if it was present in the chemistry of the GTAW filler rod into the root so that when the subsequent FCAW filler was to be deposited after wards, the added nickel in the root filler would evenly dilute into the following FCAW passes and therefore theoretically control the ferrite content but, they probably didn't use a purging gas with a slight enough amount of Nitrogen in order to counteract the loss of Nitrogen in the root deposit coalescing with the base/parent metal.

This is more than likely one scenario although, the FCAW filler could also have been made up of the other UNS number of grade 2205 duplex stainless as opposed to the same one as the base/parent metal also.

However, when you kept insisting that there is only one UNS number for Grade 2205 duplex SS, I kept trying to convince you that you were incorrect up to the point where I submitted indisputable proof, yet you still were adamant that there was only one UNS number - is the MAIN reason why I am not only upset with your utter ignorance, but I'm also in fact pizzed off at you for your obvious denial in you own statements in this thread, and that is totally unacceptable. So, if you want to finally concede that you were wrong and ignorant towards what I was attempting to prove to you, and to admit that you did indeed made such statement as the one's I posted above and apologize -I will then be more than willing to accept it!!!"

So, does nanjing even bother to admit that I did not disagree with him on the question as to whether or not the correct temperature was being used or not??? Absolutely NOT!!! Instead, he continued to push the issue without any real basis for even arguing the point he was so desperately attempting to make, sort of becoming obsessed with himself!!! So with that, I decided to "Toy" with nanjing a bit just to see if my suspicions were correct about him needing to go see an eye doctor in order to update his prescription with this response on Halloween no less

By ssbn727 (****) Date 10-31-2009 08:18

"To my dear "Friend Nanjing!" (I am being very Sarcastic when I type this in case you're wondering!) I wasn't planning on replying to anymore of your responses, but you decided to twist e verything around once again!!! You say I mentioned my liver transplant in this thread, and nothing could be further from the truth you poor excuse for a human being wh until now, I only thought that maybe, just maybe you were slightly ineabreated while reading the responses, and then you stoop down to using such a low life tactic is this??? How really pathetic you are!!! Your friend Shane actually compared you to my friend Chuck Meadows as someone who had as much knowledge as he did regarding stainless steels??? You could not hold a candle to him, and I feel bad enough that I even have to associate you in the same paragraph with Chuck who was truly superior than you as well as MAN enough to admit when he overlooked something more than once, or even flat out made a mistake when pointed out to him, and that is something you cannot do as you have demonstrated throughout this entire thread!!!

You want an answer to your stupid and MOOT QUESTION??? HERE IT IS!!! WRITE WHAT YOU MEAN, AND MEAN WHAT YOU WRITE!!! BEFORE YOU CHALLENGE ANYONE TO ANYTHING IN HERE!!! FINALLY, PROFESSOR CRISI ALREADY ANSWERED THE MAIN GIST OF YOUR QUESTION ALREADY SO, I'M JUST GONNA COPY AND PASTE IT ONCE AGAIN FOR YOUR EYES:

G.S.Crisi (****) Date 10-27-2009 07:52 Rating 3 (***)

Being a chemical engineer, I'll look at your problem from a chemical point of view.
First. You say, and paragraph 4.3.5 of Norsok standard confirms it, that the coupon was pickled for 5 minutes in the nitric and hydrofluoric acids solution at 60ºC. Scrictly speaking, pickling doesn't make part of the corrosion test. Its purpose is to remove the dirtyness (oil and grease for example) and the very very thin chromium oxyde layer that exists on the duplex alloy surface, so as to leave the coupon metal clean and pure before starting the corrosion test.
Nevertheless, 20% nitric and 5% hydrofluoric acids solutions at 60ºC is a mighty corrosive environment, so it's possible (quite possible, I'd say) that corrosion on your coupon began at this point. Carbon steel would be eaten away in a few minutes if submerged in that solution.

This percentage of pickling solution is obviously the root cause of such weight losss because the 6% ferric chloride solution by in itself could not dissolve 12 times the allowable maximum all by itself, so the fault lies in the actual percentage of nitric and Hydrofluoric acid used for pickling as the only logical cause for such an extraordinary amount of weight loss!!! So your point is MOOT regarding the 40 degrees C as being the main culprit because a difference of 5 degrees over what is normal industry practice could not account for such a huge amount of weight loss - CAPECHE???

Dear Friend??? Having friends like yourself Nanjing, then who needs enemies!!! As far as the degree is concerned, i do'nt need your lousy excuse for something to wipe my a$$ with - No Thanks!!! I've got Scott tissue which works just fine!!! The filler wire for the FCAW portion is the correct one for alloy 2205 if, and I'll emphasize a big if it was straight alloy 2205... If it was alloy for 2205+ which is formulated for the other UNS number-S32205 then, the FCAW filler would be incorrect because of the slightly different chemical composition which at this point none of us really know what is consists of... If the GTAW filler used exclusively for the root pass only was not of a type with sufficient enough N as well as Ni which also DO NOT know the exact chemical make up of either, and there wasn't enough Ni or any for that matter used in the purging medium along with too much Oxygen in PPM's then it's quite possible, and I emphasize quite possible that all of these scenario's or most of them combined in one combination or another could account for the failure in the corrosion test however, I'm leaning towards the pickling medium being too strong as the actual culprit at this point!!! So there you have it phukhead, err - I mean Nanjing, Come-Mierda, or whatever your name is!!!

In summary, no one aside from the folks who have ALL of, and I say ALL of this pertinent data could know exactly what is the ROOT cause of the corrosion test failure!!! We can only speculate as we do most of the time and that is why we have discussion like this one... Unfortunately, when a person like yourself comes in here tooting their proverbial horn like you did and totally makes such an a$$ out of themselves like you did, doesn't help welder 5354 by being so adamant with your ignorance and then avoid admitting your own mistakes, only cheapens the discussion by the way you pathetically attempted to turn around and deflect your own insecurities towards me!!! that was the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back and it's as simple as that!!! So once again - GIVE IT UP ALREADY!!!

Btw, are you stuttering here as you write this??? Because I've never thought one could such a thing with a keyboard!!! ;-) ;-) ;-) Quote: "I feel sorry for welder 5354 who came on here looking for some help and this thread has degenerated into Henry's insecurity about not having a degree and having a liver transplant and basically trying to cover up the real issue that he did not see that the problem was with with the filler wire selection for the test temperature.' Hmmmm... "with with???" Quote: "By the way Henry I do not drink too much... I spill most of it." Where? In your eyes??? Then it's no wonder your constantly unable to read or pickup everything that is pertinent in this thread :-) :-) :-)

GIVE IT A REST ALREADY!!! IT'S OBVIOUS WHO IS BEING INSECURE HERE, AND IT CERTAINLY IS NOT ME, MY DEAR FRIEND NANJING!!! :-) :-) :-)"

Henry

So what does nanjing respond with? He takes the bait and states the following...

By Nanjing (**) Date 10-31-2009 21:05 Rating 1 (*)

"Henry, my old friend you have at least answered my question at last!: So your point is MOOT regarding the 40 degrees C as being the main culprit because a difference of 5 degrees over what is normal industry practice could not account for such a huge amount of weight loss - CAPECHE???"

Henry if you had any experience at all you would know 22%Cr duplex is tested at 22-25C and super duplex is tested at 35-40C with a norm of plus or minus 2C. This can mean welder 5354 has tested his samples at possibly 18C over the normal temperature. This shows you have no frontline experience in corrosion testing duplex welding consumables. If you decide to reply please cut and paste a welding consumable manufacturer's recommendations for corrosion testing 22%Cr duplex.

I am sure your friend Chuck will be sitting on a cloud somewhere shaking his head at your technically incorrect statements. I will persevere to give advice to you and others on this forum when I can however I do not have much spare time. If you care to reply please keep it brief and to the point. I truly hope you get better soon (and I am not being sarcastic, you need help)." He doesn't realize it, but he walks right into my trap as I respond with this...

By ssbn727 (****) Date 10-31-2009 21:44

"Hah, Hah, Hah!!! You fell for my ruse after all!!!TRICK OR TREAT!!! :-) :-) :-) What I actually gave you were the PRE Numbers for Alloy 2205 and you fell for the bait my Dear friend!!! :-) :-) :-) Yeah Chuck is most definitely shaking his and laughing out loud how you fell right into my trap!!! :-) :-) :-) Actually you can go up to 30 C with Alloy 2205+ so you're not totally correct, but nice try in any event!!! Now please give it a rest because it's a shame to see you making yourself look so obtuse!!! ROTFLMFAO - ROTFLMFAO - ROTFLMFAO!!! :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) HAPPY HALLOWEEN!!!!!!! ;-) ;-) ;-) You do know the equations on how to figure them out, don't you!!! ;-) I mean after all, you should???"

Henry

So, nanjing follows up with this response:

By Nanjing (**) Date 10-31-2009 21:58

"You are trully clueless! Welder 5354 tested at 40C. u say u can go up to 30C. What do u expect to happen at 40C? Henry I am trying to help you, I want to give you the benefit of my knowledge and experience but you will not listen. If you do not want to believe me please consult others,eg DR Crisi (I do not know where he has gone.. maybe in hiding)."

I'll have to admit that my response was rather aggressive and insulting which is probably why it was deleted... So then nanjing responds with this...

By Nanjing (**) Date 10-31-2009 23:14 Rating 1 (*)

"PREN= Cr+3.33Mo+16 N (or something like that, of the top of my head!). Now answer my question. Is 22%Cr filler suitable for testing at 40C? If u think it is please substantiate it. Simple question.. give me a straight forward answer answer." So I respond accordingly with this which does answer his obseesive question on whether or not the G48 Method A pitting sorrosion test should be done @ 40 C or not and I answered it without any ambiguity as far as I can see:

By ssbn727 (****) Date 11-01-2009 03:13 Edited 11-01-2009 09:42 Rating 2 (**)

'I apologize for the late response, but I was celebrating my NY Yankees Baseball team winning their 2nd consecutive win over the Philadelphia Phillies, so I wasn't paying attention as to whether or not you even responded!!! Okay, let's see what you wrote... Hmmm, I thought so!!! You most definitely need to get your eyes checked Nanjing... Why??? It's really quite simple yet ohhh sooo subtle that it escaped your eyes completely and here's what I mean exactly as well as without any ambiguity whatsoever!!! ;-)

First off this is where you misread my question and proved just how important it is for you to get you eyesight checked...Get rid of the the percentage of "Nickel" and you are correct for the PRE Number, as opposed to the PREN Number which is what you thought I wrote so, although I will not be as critical as you were with me, it just proves to me and everyone else again that you need to get your eyes checked my dear friend Nanjing!!! :-) :-) :-)

Okay, now that I've clarified what your problem really is, I'll answer your straightforward question with a straightforward answer (Did you actually think that I would do such a thing Nanjing???)...

NO!!! Why??? Because you'll surpass the critical pitting temperature, or CPT @ around 22 -23 degrees C to a maximum of around 24-25 degrees C with heats that have lower percentages of Ni as well as N & Mo in their chemical compositions in both the Base/parent metals & welding filler metals, and since there are only a few brand manufacturers of both base/parent metals which have slightly elevated amounts of these alloying elements while simultaneously staying within the bounds of what is still considered an Alloy 2205 grade of duplex Stainless Steel, only slightly enhanced when one observes it with appropriate over alloying N, a "smidgen" (which in my book is a really, really small amount in order to increase pitting and crevice corrosion) more of Mo & Ni (which slows the formation of brittle intermetallic compounds as well as increasing yield strength) as well, then combining them with similarly enhanced weld filler metals of the 2209 grade, one can quite possibly increase the level of the CPT only slightly more to about a maximum of up to 30 degrees C and that would only be feasible if cost was not a factor at all!!!

And it would probably require much more welder training for qualifying just to the WPS alone, and then subsequently towards production which would also have to be factored into the overall costs and I don't have to tell yo u how hard that is to convince as well as how rare it is to occur - yet it has in the past on occasion!!! ;-) ;-) ;-) IMHO, I would rather switch to either a richer grade of Duplex, or switch to a Super Duplex grade all together, but that would require approval from both the owner as well as the EOR and that's as possible as it is for one to win the Powerball & Super Seven numbers lotterysimultaneously!!!;-) ;-) ;-)

In summary, for alloy 2205, 22 to 25 degrees C maximum is the recommended CPT for ASTM G48-03 Method A only, before pitting in the weld and too much of the allowable weight/mass loss of the sample is reached even though the increased amount of weight/mass loss doesn't come close to 12 times the amount of weight/mass loss shown in this test since it is also required that the test be interrupted once more than 5% of the total weight/mass has been lost, and this must have happened way before the test reached the 24th hour!!! So this fact, makes me even more convinced that the pickling solution which is NOT required to be used in the ASTM G48-03, Method A corrosion test was indeed a factor in such a substantial amount of weight/mass loss of the specimen in question as Professor Crisi so eloquently pointed out in his previous post!!! The pickling solution really was indeed a factor in contributing to such a substantial amount of weight/mass loss of the specimen in question.

Although, it is quite possible without any regards for increased costs whatsoever to increase the maximum CPT to around up to 30 degrees C if increased scrutiny with respect to the chemical compositions of favorable heats in both base/parent metal as well as weld filler metal were incorporated in order to achieve the increased results of those CPT's before pitting would start show so prevalently as well as such a substantial amount of weight/mass loss. So there you have it Nanjing!!! You managed to persuade it out of me finally!!! ;-) ;-) ;-) Anywho, it was fun watching you react in the way you did durng this discussion nonetheless!!! :-) :-) :-) Promise me that you will go to the EYE DOCTOR??? SEE YA!!! WOULDN'T WANT TO BE YA!!! :-) :-) :-)

Your Dear Freund, (intentionally spelled that way! ;-) )
Henry" Well, it's obvious at this point that I answered nanjing's question already here very clearly, and if you look back at this post (By ssbn727 (****) Date 10-30-2009 01:24)
which I have as my first response in this string of posts which I copied and pasted into this post, it clearly states that I did not disagree with what he was saying regarding the 40 C temperature as well as stating that there may just be other factors, possibilities, probabilities as well, but we do not have all of the necessary data to be absolutely confident in what the actual root cause was why the test failed!!! Okay! So what does nanjing do after my last response in this chronological chain of posts??? Well, you just may find this interesting enough when nanjing responds with this:

By Nanjing (**) Date 11-01-2009 05:49 Rating 2 (**)

"Henry. 40C it was tested at. Just answer my question. Is this a normal temperature for testing 22%Cr? Cut the bull.... you are talking round in circles! You cannot admit you are wrong on this as it will prove you are just a joke once and for all." Now is that anyway for someone to behave themselves after I just answered his question with my previous response??? Hmmm... Well, then all of a sudden -3.? decides to put in his view with this post:

By 3.2 Inspector (***) Date 11-01-2009 07:22 Rating 1 (*)

"He always does that, he simply refuse to answer a straight forward question.

3.2" Well, I must say that these two did rather disappoint me with their lack of observation to the answer I had already given nanjing, so I decided to express my disappointment with this response:

By ssbn727 (****) Date 11-01-2009 09:50 Rating 2.33 (**)

"Now I'm really disappointed in both of you guys!!! I would have thought by now that both of you would have realized by now that I am obviously correct as well as vindicated in not only my observations, but also my own experiments on both of your capabilities, or rather lack of combined capabilities to read properly even as I intentionally used both bold type face as well as italics combined intentional , yet subtle changes in some of the technical nomenclature to no avail even though your friend Shane acknowledged the use of these visual aids, in the hopes that both of you would be able to distinguish as well as comprehend all of my responses to you, and since you have both failed miserably on multiple occasions to become enlightened by my attempts up until now...

I've reached the point where even if I have already given you the answer to your multiple queries directed specifically towards me, both of you are still incapable of articulating it and I suppose it is because of the distinct differences between being familiar with the British, or "King's English" version of the English language which is obviously is quite different than the American Northeastern dialect to be more specific, version of the English language that I use to communicate with just about everyone I know and even most folks whom I do not have any previous communication just fine!!! And it is a shame - PERIOD!!! :-( :-( :-(

However, I will not give up in pointing out to both of you that in my second to most current previous post before this one, I have answered your query as specifically as possible, so all you both need to do is to re-read my last two posts in this thread ,and you should then understand that both of you desperately need to seek the attention of an eye doctor!!!

Here's a tip... All you have to do is to look at the date and time of when my last two posts in this thread by comparing them with this one which will be when I'm finished writing and posting it, my most current post in the thread... Once you are able to figure that out and I pray that you both do, then you will both see the obvious error, or rather lack of sufficient eyesight in both of you at this time!!! ;-) ;-) ;-) Tah- Tah Gentlemen!!! for I am done here!!! Find the answer and do what you will with it!!! :-) :-) :-) I really do not care anymore!!! :-) :-) :-)

Your Dearest Freund, (Once again, intentionally spelled in this manner for your amusement!;-) )
Henry

P.S. I must admit to you both that I have had what I generally considered a rather bizarre, yet amusing time during my attempt to establish a meaningful relationship with both of you during this discussion as it has on many different occasions, reminded me of being spontaneously cast on "Saturday Night Live," the Famous and still running show on late night and can be found in the NBC network of American Broadcast Televison!!! :-) :-) :-) Auf Wiedersehen!!! ;-) ;-) ;-)"

I have to admit that at this point, I almost fell out of my chair more times than I can remember from the comedy exhibition these two were displaying!!! :) :) :)

At this point the thread is continued on page two all the way down to this post..
I know I said that I would not post here in this thread anymore, but after reading the last posts, I could not stop myself from posting this sort of "Play by Play" in order to clarify who said what to whom and when, because sometimes it can be hard to follow the sequence of the posts in chronological order so that the person who reads the thread can get a clear understanding of what is actually going on in the particular thread especially if there is a lot of back and forth going on that only adds to the confusion in trying to find out what is actually being discussed in the thread. ;) So, I hope that by posting this series of previous posts that are part of this overall thread, most of the confusion can be put to rest once and for all!!! ;) ;) ;)

P.S. Please make note of the .pdf file I have attached which clearly shows with the blue arrow head how high of a temperature in C can one expect to pass the ASTM G48 Method A, pitting corrosion test with the coupon being of a 22% Cr duplex alloy (S31803) using a Zeron (25% Cr) 100X GTAW root pass followed by a 22% Cr filler then one will see where I'm getting at once and for all. A very interesting thread indeed!!! :) :) :)

P.P.S. Please use the "Zoom" feature in the Adobe .pdf file, and zoom it up to 150% to clearly see where the blue arrowhead is on the 30 degree C mark, then follow the blue line down as it cuts across the black bar in the graph which clearly shows the CPT beyond 30 C for the 22% Cr duplex (S31803) grade of base/parent metal with it being welded with a Zeron (25% Cr) filler for the root pass only and followed with filling and capping with a 22% Cr filler using pure Argon shielding gas! ;)

Respectfully,
Henry

Attachment: Presentation1.pdf (165k)

By Nanjing Date 11-06-2009 21:15 Edited 11-06-2009 21:36

Henry, you are at it again talking in circles.

Welder 5354 had a problem with his corrosion test failing ASTM G48 and Norsok M601.

I laid the blame on the failure as testing at too high a temperature. I have two reasons for coming to this conclusion which are:

1) I have many years of experience in testing duplex welding procedures to the above standards.

2) I have had personal experience of a failure in 22%Cr filler tested at 40C.

I have asked you several times to state clearly if you think testing at 40C was acceptable and you never answered.

Henry, really to close this thread you need to answer this simple question:

Is 40C acceptable for testing welder 5354's procedure?

One word Henry, one word... Yes or No.

Henry, you failed to note that on the Metrode document there are two small lines to the left of the red arrow I marked. They are identified as typical specification (22C for 22%Cr consumable) and maximum specification (25C for a 25%Cr filler).

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-06-2009 21:48

Nanjing!

You must have Mule DNA or something to that effect!!! :( :( :( Now I'm really starting to feel sorry for you - honestly!!! Why don't you just give it a rest already since I already answered your question more than once, and everyone else who has read this ENTIRE THREAD knows this as well!!! Please!!! For your own dignity, your own sanity nanjing! GIVE IT A REST FOR CRYING OUT LOUD ALREADY!!!

Henry

By Nanjing Date 11-06-2009 22:57

Simple answer now Henry, one word, come on now... We are all waiting with bated breath.

Yes or no.

No more bull...!

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-06-2009 23:07

nanjing!

There's a picture of someone releasing very volatile gaseous compounds in the atmosphere just for your viewing!!! It reminds me of you constantly asking the same question which you continue to do much like a broken record, yet in the picture I'm referring to shows your level of frustration and how you choose to release your frustration besides posting the crap you continue to do in this thread... Here's the link, and I want you to pay close attention to the last one in the bottom row which depicts you so accurately!!! :) :) :) Now anyone who is too young to view this please refrain from doing so!!! :) :) I appreciate your understanding and patience! ;)

http://www.aws.org/cgi-bin/mwf/topic_show.pl?tid=23149

ENJOY nanjing! ;)

Henry

By Nanjing Date 11-07-2009 00:39

Henry, still cannot give an answer in one word to a simple question?....

you have made a total fool out of yourself on this forum.

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-07-2009 01:07

No nanjing!

I'm afraid you've done an excellent job of doing so, and I must admit that you certainly out-rank as well as have outdone anyone whom I have come across this forum since I've been participating in here from 2001 as the most persistent person to uphold the title of - shall I say an incorrigible jester whose impenitence, pugnacious abnegation to the facts before you are beyond the normal standards of conduct!!! ;) I believe that just about sums it up. Remember to be good to yourself for it is as always in that you reap what you sow nanjing! ;)

Henry

By Nanjing Date 11-07-2009 03:07

You just cannot give a one word answer can you?

Keep running and trying to deflect the issue, Henry you imposter!

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 11-07-2009 04:18 Edited 11-07-2009 17:01

Sticks and stones may sometimes break my bones, but names will never, and I mean never harm me nanjing!!! :) :) :)

Btw, nanjing! Have you ever meditated??? It's a very good way to relax and remove all of the pent up stress that seems to have accumulated in your mind over the years since you are after all, exhibiting such a lack of composure lately with your repeated barking of ridiculous demands which were already met time and time again...

So I ask you nanjing! Why don't you just go swimming or meditate, go mountain climbing, or whatever it is that relax you because you're really showing signs of losing your sanity nanjing!

And it doesn't look good for you at this point, but I've seen people recover from your condition before, so there is hope for you no matter how bad it looks for you currently...

I will pray for you nanjing!!! God Bless you Nanjing!
Don't forget to take your anti-psychotic medicine now
Don't worry! You will fell much better real soon now!
Bye-bye nanjing!

Henry

By Nanjing Date 11-07-2009 23:22

One word answer Henry, everyone knows you cannot do it.

I would have let this go and spared you further embarrassment if you had not been so abusive.

Come now Henry a man of your intellect should be able to answer my question,

Yes or no.

Next post I want to see just one word.

Anymore and this will be an admission of defeat.

One word only!

By Nanjing Date 11-15-2009 00:54

Henry, I am still waiting for you to reply.

Remember one word, yes or no.

By Nanjing Date 11-16-2009 15:19

Henry, I am still waiting one word answer now.

By jrw159

Date 11-16-2009 17:46

I can not speak for Henry but I can clearly read.

"NO!!! Why??? Because you'll surpass the critical pitting temperature, or CPT @ around 22 -23 degrees C to a maximum of around 24-25 degrees C"

That was not good enough for you??

You got the answer you wanted. Do you want it in one word?? It is there if you will just pull your head out long enough to see.

"NO!!!"

If you disagree, that is fine. Let it go already. You are truly making an A** out of yourself and I, for one, am tired of it. GET OVER IT AND MOVE ON. Surely you are not childish enough to continue this school yard fifth grade behavior. If you are, please go to one or all of these sites.

http://www.haveasteamingcupofshutthehellupalready.net

http://www.growthehellupandgetalife.com

http://www.gettingtiredofhearingyourcrap.org

http://www.achildinamansbody.com

http://www.whaawhaawhaa.com

Your question has been answered by Henry and you really need to stop, take a deep breath and MOVE ON.

jrw159

By Nanjing Date 11-17-2009 07:53

You sent this to the wrong person. I know what the critical pitting temperatures are. You should have sent it to your friend Henry as he clearly doesn't.

By the way you are correct, you cannot speak for Henry.