Carbon Equivalent

Basicity Index Type Equations - I
% O from Metal Oxide

Mrajek ' s Index = − Mrazek ,1869
% O from SiO2
% CaO
Vee Ratio = − Blum ,1901
% SiO2
% CaO + 1.4% MgO
B= Sum of Basic Oxides
% SiO2 + 0.84% P2 O5 B. I . =
Sum of Acidic Oxides
B = ( % CaO + % MgO + % MnO ) − (% SiO2 + % P2 O5 + % TiO2 )
% CaO
B LF =
% SiO2 + % Al2 O3
% CaO + 1.4% MgO

B LF =
% SiO2 + 0.6% Al2 O3
CaF2 + CaO + MgO + BaO + SrO + Na 2 O + K 2 O + Li2 O + 1

2 ( MnO + FeO )
B=
SiO2 + 1
2 ( Al O2 3 + TiO2 + ZrO2 )
CaO + MgO + BaO + SrO + Na 2 O + K 2 O + Li2 O + 1

2 ( MnO + FeO )
B=
SiO2 + 1
2 ( Al O2 3 + TiO2 + ZrO2 )
Tuliani’s
Tuliani’sFormula,
Formula,1978
1978
Colorado School of Mines - CSM

Center for Welding, Joining and Coatings Research - CWJCR
Basicity Index Type Equations - II
Electron Donor Power of Oxygen in Oxide Systems
Optical Basicity =
Electron Donor Power of Free Oxide Anions
Z A RA
O. B. = ∑
AllCations 2GA
1971
1971--Duffy
Duffyand
andIngram
Ingram ZA = Coordination Number of Cation A
# Molesof Cation A
RA =
# Molesof Oxygen Atoms
GA = Basicity Moderating Parameter dependingon Pauling' s Electronegativity
IonicFractionof Free AnionsO−2 intheDissociated Slag

BZ =
Sumof All Anionsand Cationsof theSystem
Zeke,
Zeke,1980 BZ =
∑m Me2O (
+ ∑ mMeO − mAl2O3 + 2mSiO2 + 2mTiO2 )
( ) ( )
1980
∑2m Me2O + ∑m MeO + 3 mCaF2 + mBaF2 + mSiO2 + mTiO2 + 2mAl2O3 + nO−2

High and Medium Strength Steels
Subjected to Welding Heat Cycle
Comparison between High and Low Heat Inputs
(Svensson, 95)

Heat
Affected
Zone
Properties
(Düren, Korkhaus, and Niederhoff, 3R International, 87)

Typical Problems observed in High
Strength Steel Welding
Metallurgical Origin:
HAZ Cracking
WM Microfissuring
(Rowe
(Rowe and
and Liu,
Liu, 99)
99) HAC Cracking
(Rowe and Liu, 99)
Processing Origin:
Porosity at Long Arc or Improper Start
Slag Inclusions at Low Current
Variable Current at Different Positions

Steel Weldability Map: Cracking
Concerns
(ASM, Welding Handbook V. 6, 93)

HY-80/100
EH-36
HSLA-65 HSLA-80/100
(Graville, 76)

Steel Weldability Indices - Carbon
Equivalent Type Expressions
IIW
Mn + Si * Cr + Mo + V Ni + Cu
CE = C + + +
6 5 15
Winterton
Mn Cu Cr Ni Mo V
CE = C + + + + − −
6 40 10 20 50 10
Cottrell
Mn Cr + Mo V Nb 0.0001
CE = C + + + + +
6 5 3 4C S
* Omitted in the original Dearden & O’Neill formula

DnV
Si Mn Ni + Cu Cr Mo V
CE = C + + + + + +
24 10 40 5 4 14
D
Si Mn + Cu Cr Ni + Mo V
CE = C + + + + +
25 16 20 20 15
PCM
Si Mn + Cu + Cr Mo V Ni
PCM =C+ + + + + + 5B
30 20 15 10 60
CEN
⎡ Si Mn Cu Ni Cr + Mo + Nb + V ⎤
CEN = C + A ( C ) ⋅ ⎢ + + + + + 5B ⎥
⎣ 24 6 15 20 5 ⎦
Steel Weldability Indices – Fundamental
Approaches
Thermodynamic Approach
⎡C + KMnMn + KSi Si + … + KC' CLnC ⎤
CE = K o ⎢ ' ⎥
⎢⎣ +KMnMnLnMn + KSi SiLnSi + … ⎥⎦
'
Kinetics Approach
CE = K o′C [1 + KC′ C + KMn
′ Mn + KSi′ Si + …]
Partitioning Approach
⎡1 + KC′′C + KMn
′′ Mn + KSi′′ Si + … + K LC
′′ LnC ⎤
CE = Ko′′C ⎢ ⎥
+
⎣ LCK ′′ CLnC + K ′′
LMnMnLnMn + K ′′
LSi SiLnSi + …⎦
(Liu et al., 1986)
Yurioka
H Max = 442C + 99CE II + 206 + ( 402C − 90CE II +80 ) ⋅ arctan ( x )
log t8 / 5 − 2.3CE I − 1.35CE III + 0.882
x ( rad ) =
1.15CE I − 0.673CE III − 0.601
Si Mn Cu Ni Cr Mo
CE I = C + + + + + + + ∆H
24 6 15 12 8 4
Si Mn + Cr + V Cu Ni Mo Nb
CE II = C + + + + + +
24 5 10 18 2.5 3
Mn Cu Ni Cr Mo
CE III = C + + + + +
3.6 20 9 5 4
∆H = f ( B , N )
For fully martensite microstructure:
HVM = 884C (1 − 0.3C 2 ) + 294
Steel Weldability Indices -
∆t8/5 Calculation
Rosenthal Solution (1946)
∆t8/5 is directly related to the heat input (H)

⎛ ηH ⎞
∆t8 5 = 8.149 x10 −4 ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 2πκ ⎠ η = Efficiency
H = Heat input
κ = Thermal conductivity
⎛ ηH ⎞ 2
∆t 8 5 = 2.767 x10 ⎜ 2 −6 ρ = Specific gravity
⎜ 4h πκρ C ⎟⎟
⎝ p ⎠ Cp = Specific Heat

Lorenz & Düren
H = 2019 ⎡⎣(1 − 0.5log t8 / 5 ) ⋅ C + 0.3 ( CE − C ) ⎤⎦ + 66 (1 − 0.8log t8 / 5 )
Mn Si Cr Mo V Ni Cu
CE = C + + + + + + +
8 11 5 6 3 17 9
Mn + Cu Si Cr + V Mo Ni
CE * = C + + + + + * For pipeline grade steels
16 25 10 15 40
Düren – For 100% Microstructure (M or B) in HAZ
HVM = 802C + 305
⎛ Mn Si Cr Mo V Ni Cu ⎞
HVB = 350 ⎜ C + + + + + + + ⎟ + 101
⎝ 8 11 5 6 3 17 9 ⎠
WELD STRENGTH MODEL
RP0.2 ( MPa ) = 3.1H Max ( 0.1) − 80
n
Akelsen, Rørvik, Onsøien, and Grong
n = 0.065 ( t8 / 5 )
0.17
YS = 232 + 1.9t − 0.26T50 − 0.09GS Blackburn et al. (1997)

⎛ dT ⎞
UTS = 313 − 8.3ln ⎜ 1.8 ⎟ + 3.8t − 0.36T50 − 0.08GS
⎝ dt ⎠
YS = 0.2 % offset yield strength, ksi
t = thickness, cm
T50 = 50 % transformation temperature, oC
GS = austenite grain size
UTS = ultimate tensile strength, ksi
dT = calculated cooling rate, oC/s
dt

Application: Steel Weldability Index
Weld
Metal
Base
Metal

Heat Affected
Zone Properties
Empirical
Relationships
(Svensson, 95)

Weld Metal
Properties
Empirical
Relationships
(Svensson, 95)
Possibilities of Crack-Free
X-100 Steel Welds
250
TM Steels up to X-100
6 mm Cylindrical Specimens
200 with spiral notch
Preheating Temperature ( C)
No Cracking Heat Input: 8-9 kJ/cm

o
150
Thickness of Backing Plate:
20 mm
Risk of Cracking Critical implant
100
Stress/Yield Strength:
100%
50 [H]Dif ≥ 40 cm3/100g
(According to Implant Test Results
using Cellulosic Electrodes)
0
0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.50
(Hillenbrand, Niederhoff, Hauck,
Carbon Equivalent (%) Pertender, Wellnitz, 1997)

Hydrogen Embrittlement Susceptibility:
Martensite Start Temperature - Ms
∆ Martensite Start Temperature - ∆Ms
Andrew – Linear (1965)
Ms = 539 – 423C – 30.4Mn – 17.7 Ni – 12.1Cr – 7.5Mo
Self et al. (1986) – Wrought Metal:

Ms = 521 – 350C – 14.3Cr – 17.5Ni –28.9Mn – 37.6Si – 29.5Mo
– 1.19Cr.Ni + 23.1(Cr+Mo)C
Self et al. (1986) – Weld Metal:
Ms = 521 – 350C – 13.6 Cr – 16.6Ni – 25.1Mn – 30.1Si – 40.4Mo
– 40 Al – 1.07Cr.Ni + 21.9(Cr+0.73Mo)C
Other Ms Equations include Payson & Savage (1944), Carapella (1944),

∆Ms = MsWM - MsHAZ Rowland & Lyle (1946), Grange & Stewart (1946), Nehrenberg (1946),
Steven & Haynes (1956), and Others.

Cracking-No Cracking Map
for High Strength Steel Welds
(Rowe and Liu, 99)
(Wang and Liu, 97)

(Olson, Wang, Liu et al, 96)
Weld Undermatching and Overmatching:
Non-Uniform Hydrogen Distribution
0.5
0.4
(Wang and Liu, 97)
Overmatched
Overmatched
∆H (HWM - HHAZ) (ml/100g metal.atm )
1/2
Weld
Weld Metal
Metal
0.3
0.2 Evenmatched
Evenmatched
Microfissuring Weld
Weld Metal
Metal
0.1 Transverse Cracking
0.0
-0.1
HAZ
-0.2 Cracking
-0.3
-0.4 Undermatched
Undermatched
Weld
Weld Metal
Metal
-0.5
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60
o
∆Ms (MsWM - MsHAZ) ( C)


Carbon Equivalent

Cargado por

Información del documento

Descripción original:

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Carbon Equivalent

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Basicity Index Type Equations - I

% O from Metal Oxide

% CaO + 1.4% MgO

CaF2 + CaO + MgO + BaO + SrO + Na 2 O + K 2 O + Li2 O + 1

CaO + MgO + BaO + SrO + Na 2 O + K 2 O + Li2 O + 1

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

IonicFractionof Free AnionsO−2 intheDissociated Slag

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

(Düren, Korkhaus, and Niederhoff, 3R International, 87)

(Rowe and Liu, 99)

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

(ASM, Welding Handbook V. 6, 93)

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

* Omitted in the original Dearden & O’Neill formula

∆t8/5 is directly related to the heat input (H)

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

YS = 232 + 1.9t − 0.26T50 − 0.09GS Blackburn et al. (1997)

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

No Cracking Heat Input: 8-9 kJ/cm

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

Self et al. (1986) – Wrought Metal:

Other Ms Equations include Payson & Savage (1944), Carapella (1944),

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

(Rowe and Liu, 99)

(Wang and Liu, 97)

Colorado School of Mines - CSM

También podría gustarte