Not logged inAmerican Welding Society Forum
Forum AWS Website Help Search Login
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / Pipeline Tendencies
- - By js55 (*****) Date 06-06-2014 13:29
I wanted to start a general discussion about what we are predominantly seeing at this time, primarily in the defrac sector but pipelines as a whole as well, pertaining to current specification tendencies for filler metals, testing regimes, etc.
Specifically, what are we generally seeing for:
Cellulosic fillers for X60, 65, 70, and 80 if anybody has spent much time on this. Roots and F and C.
Testing regimes such as impacts, corrosion, etc.. What temps are we seeing mostly? What acceptance criteria? API 1104?
Has anybody seen alloys other than the API 5L types?
How much TMCP stuff is happening out there?
What are we seeing as far as transitions from normalizing to TMCP pertaining to yield strength?
Parent - - By jarsanb (***) Date 06-06-2014 21:45
Speaking about the company I work for and not generalizing accross the industry:

Large projects are contracted. Contractors typically use cellulosic electrodes for construction. In-house construction is performed with low hydrogen electrodes/processes.
One of our current projects is 28 miles of 36" .625 wall X65 pipe. Procedure being used is E6010 root, fill/cap E8010. On another project, new construction -12" diameter, 1.312 wall welded with E6010 root, fill/cap E7018 w/PHWT. All field welds. Procedures qualified for these projects included API 5L X60, X65 and X70 materials. Qualification included API 1104 and enigeer specified impact testing. Temps were -40F, -20F, 0 F and 32F for each procedure with regards to charpy. Our projects are to CFR and State Gas Safety Code so therfore API 1104 section 9 is used for inspection. Pipeline maintenance is a different issue with regards to welding procedures. Our system engineers are not familiar with TMCP but probably should be since design temps are for -20F. Engineering has been and will continue to be very busy with infrastructure remediation.
Parent - By js55 (*****) Date 06-09-2014 15:30
jars,
thanks.
The 6010/8010 combo seems quite common for the field WPS's I have reviewed.
We utilize predominantly XX18 (or even 1% Ni for CVN's) in shop but as we expand into the field the pipeline guys want their cellulosics.
- - By A_DAB_will_do (*) Date 06-09-2014 19:10
Not seeing much X80 pipe in North America.  I think, because it has to be imported from Japan, Europe, China, Turkey, or India if it's over 24" in diameter. Last time I looked there weren't any Mills in the USA making large OD X80 grade pipe.  Pipe from the first two countries/regions are typically TMCP grades, while the latter two are more highly alloyed.  Pipe from China, would be a mixed bag, depending on the Mill I guess.  But I've never seen pipe from China here in North America.

Makes selecting filler metals a pain if there's any possibility of mixing the two types of high strength pipe on the same job.  Personally, I don't think you'll see any X80 pipe welded with XX10 electrodes due to fear of hydrogen cracking.  Most of the big stuff will be welded with solid wire and automatics; except for tie ins and repairs.  That work will be done with low hydrogen stick and FCAW.

lots and lots of grade B through X70 in the lower 48 states.  Virtually all of it welded with XX10 rod.  I don't see this changing any time soon.  Welding X70 with XX10 rod makes me a little nervous.  It's right on the edge of where hydrogen cracking can become a significant problem, moreso if preheat and interpass temps aren't well controlled.
Parent - By js55 (*****) Date 06-09-2014 19:57
A,
Excellent info thanks.
So then, from what you have posted it seems that what we would consider the more advanced countries, US, Japan, Europe have moved well into TMCP (even for lower strength levels like 65 and 70) while the less advance countries are still doing it with higher alloying. TMCP becomes very mill specific. Almost like a fingerprint.
I can see where mixing technologies on the same job would be a problem. Seems to me the HAZ is a tougher nut to crack with TMCP than with normalized, since the HAZ is very close to normalizing anyway and not even close to thermo-mechanical processing.
The method of manufacture is critical to the viability of the weldment. You qualify a procedure with normalized X65 or X70 and you may not have a strong enough weld if you use those heat inputs on a TMCP material.
Up Topic Welding Industry / General Welding Discussion / Pipeline Tendencies

Powered by mwForum 2.29.2 © 1999-2013 Markus Wichitill