Está en la página 1de 33

Issues Of Concern To ASME Boiler & Pressure

Vessel Committee TG On Creep-Strength


Enhanced Ferritic Steels, And Remedies Under
Consideration
J. F. Henry

IIW-AWS
Technical Lectures
The Cr-Mo Steels
January/February 2006

A Need For Comprehensive Rules


For This Class of Alloys
Many Problems With Use Of Grade 91 With Existing
ASME Rules
With The Advent Of The Next Generation Of CreepStrength Enhanced Ferritic Steels Grades 23, 92,
911, 122, etc. There Is A Clear Basis For Concern
That Problems Will Be Compounded In The Absence
Of Comprehensive, Technically Defensible And
Widely Accepted Sets of Rules
Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

SCII Task Group Considering The


Creep-Strength Enhanced Ferritic Steels

A Section II (Materials) Task Group Has


Been Formed To Review Current Code
Rules Governing The Use Of The CreepStrength Enhanced Ferritic Steels And
Make Recommendations For Changes That
Will Control Their Use More Effectively

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Task Group Consists Of Industry Specialists In The


Development And Use Of The CSEF Steels And Includes
The Following:

D. Canonico (Past Chmn - Main Committee, Exec. VP: Board of Pressure Vessel Technology
K. Coleman (EPRI)
J. Feldstein (Vice Chmn: Main Committee, Chmn:SC IX)
P. Flenner (Consultant)
D. Gandy (EPRI)
M. Gold (Chmn: SC II)
J. Henry (Alstom) - Chairman
F. Masuyama (Professor, Alloy Developer)
W. Newell (Euroweld)
M. Praeger (MPC)
B. Roberts (Consultant)
W. Sperko (Consultant)
R. Swindeman (ORNL)
J. Tanzosh (B&W)
J.C. Vaillant (V&M Tubing)
Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Principal Attention On Safety Issues

Primary Focus Of Task Group, Consistent With


Explicit Code Mission, Are Those Issues With
Obvious Safety Implications
Since One Important Use For These Alloys Is
As Piping For The Main And Hot Reheat
Steamlines In Power Plants, Anything That
Potentially Affects Rupture Strength Or Weld
Integrity Is An Issue
Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Quick Review of Basic Metallurgy


CSEF Steels All Depend For Their Elevated
Temperature Strength On A Specific Condition Of
Microstructure
The Precipitation Of Temper Resistant
Carbides/Carbo-Nitrides At Crystalline Defect Sites
Impedes Material Flow At Elevated Temperatures
Anything That Disrupts This Structure, Reduces The
Strength And Stability Of The Alloys
Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Issue 1: Intercritical Heat Treatment/


Overtempering/Undertempering
Problem:

(a) ICHT Coarsens, but does not fully dissolve, precipitates; pinning
effect is lost and new martensite has reduced high temperature
strength (strength drops to level of Grade 9)
b) Overtempering Precipitates are coarsened, lath structure is destroyed,
rupture strength drops to Grade 9 level
c) Undertempering More rapid recovery, brittle structure, SCC
susceptibility

Solution:

(a) Impose Upper Temperature Limit On Tempering And PWHT To Avoid


ICHT And Overtempering
b) Review Minimum Tempering Limits
c) Prohibit Localized Heat Treatments If Temperature Exceeds AC1

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

The Effects Of Intercritical Heating

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Task Group Action

Normalizing of Grades 91, 911, 23, 92, and 122: 1900-1975F

Tempering of Grades 91, 911, 23, 92, and 122:

1350-1470F

PWHT of Grades 91, 911, 23, 92, and 122: <1/2


>1/2

1325-1470F
1350-1470F

Note: For DMWs, if the Chromium content of the filler material < 3%, or if
the filler material is an austenitic or nickel based material, then the minimum
tempering temperature remains 1300F.

For any component in which a portion of the component is heated above


1470, the component must be re-normalized and tempered in its entirety, or as
an alternate, the heated portion can be removed from the component for renormalizing and tempering and replaced into the component.
Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Issue 2: Post-Weld Heat Treatment


Problem: Some elements, such as Ni, depress both
A1 and A3 temperatures, and Ms and Mf
temperatures. Risk of either intercritical
heat treat damage or presence of
untempered martensite in weld metal (AWS
allows up to 1% Ni in weld metal vs 0.4%
max. in base metal specifications).
Solution: Modify PWHT requirement based on Ni
+ Mn Content.
Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Effect of Ni and Mn on A1 Temperature

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Task Group Action

For P 5B, Group 2 Material (Only Grade 91, at Present)


PWHT Temperature Range: 1350-1425 F (730-775 C)
< 5 thick: 1 hr/in, 30 min. minimum
> 5 thick: 5 hr + 15 min for each inch over 5
For weld thickness < 0.5 , minimum PWHT temperature is 1325 F
If chemical composition of matching filler metal is known; the
maximum PWHT temperature can be increase as follows:
If Ni + Mn < 1.50%, but > 1.0%, the max. PWHT temp. = 1450 F (790 C)
If Ni + Mn < 1.0%, the max. PWHT temperature = 1470 F (800 C)

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Task Group Action - PWHT

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Issue 3: Code Acceptance Of New Materials


Problem: The Code Does Not Specify Any Control Of The
Chemistry Of The Minimum of 3 Qualifying
Heats Relative To The Suppliers Recommended
Ranges. For CSEF Steels, The Level Of
Precipitate-Forming Elements Is Critical To
Material Performance (Example of Grade 23)
Solution: (a) Require That Qualifying Heats Include A
Rich And Lean Heat
(b) Approve Chemistry Ranges Based Strictly On
Chemistries Of Qualifying Heats
(c) Insure Careful Review Of All Intentionally
Added Elements (e.g., Aluminum)
Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Grade 23 Chemistry Requirements

Element

Compositional Limits, %

Carbon
Manganese
Phosphorus, max.
Sulfur, max.
Silicon, max.
Chromium
Molybdenum
Tungsten
Vanadium
Columbium
Nitrogen, max.
Aluminum, max.
Boron

0.04-0.10
0.10-0.60
0.030
0.010
0.50
1.90-2.60
0.05-0.30
1.45-1.75
0.20-0.30
0.02-0.08
0.030
0.030
0.0005-0.006

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Issue 4: Cold Work Effects On Creep-Rupture


Strength
Problem: The energy induced by cold work can destabilize
the structure, triggering more rapid
recovery/recrystallization, with loss of the desired
microstructure. Different alloys do not respond in
the same manner to the same level of cold work,
according to limited studies performed to date (e.g.
Grade 91 vs Grade 92).
Solution: Impose requirements for each alloy so that above a
certain level of cold strain, renormalizing and
tempering of the component is required. For
Grades 23 and 91, the level probably will be near
20% cold strain. (R/D 2.5)
Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Effect of Cold-Work On Stress-Rupture Behavior Of Grade 91 Material


100.0

Imputed Mean For Grade 91 (<3 in.)


Imputed Mean For Grade 91 (>3 in.)
Imputed Minimum For Grade 91 (<3 in.)
Imputed Minimum For Grade 91 (>3 in.)
Grade 91-Base Metal (0%CW)
Grade 91-30%CW
Grade 91-20%CW

Stress (ksi)

Grade 91-10%CW

10.0

Note: Imputed Mean And Minimum Properties Are Calculated Based on ASME Maximum Allowable Stress
1.0
57.00

58.00

59.00

60.00

61.00

62.00

63.00

64.00

65.00

66.00

67.00

68.00

69.00

LMP=(T+460)(36+logt)/1000

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Issue 5: Control of Properties Through


Hardness Testing
Problem: A quick and inexpensive method for evaluating process
integrity is needed, and hardness testing is an obvious tool that
may provide an indication of the condition of the material.
However, there can be substantial variability in portable
hardness test results. Variables include type of tester (e.g.,
rebound vs penetration), skill of tester, surface decarburization,
surface cold work, intercritical heat treatment effects.
Solution: Impose recommended hardness limits that, if exceeded,
require additional testing (e.g., replication, destructive
sampling) to demonstrate integrity of the processing. (Note
that this does not address the issue of intercritical heat
treatment effects.)

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Issue 6: Stress-Corrosion Cracking


Problem: The 9-12% Cr CSEF Steels can be susceptible to
SCC in the fully hardened condition a kind of
sensitization. Environment and composition are
factors of unknown (at this time) significance.
Solution: Impose limits on permissible time between
completion of welding or normalizing and
completion of PWHT or tempering. Or, require that
hardened component be maintained dry until
tempering/PWHT. Or, require NDE after completion
of tempering/PWHT to demonstrate freedom from
cracking (both OD and ID surfaces).
Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

SCC in Grade 91 at Safe End Welds.

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Issue 7: Use of Tempering Parameter To


Control Processing of CSEF Steels
Problem: Accurate control of final properties can only be
achieved through the use of a tempering parameter.
The final microstructure is a function of total time at
temperatures (unless the critical limits are exceeded.)
However, optimum range of parameters for each
material have not been definitively established.
Solution: Commission additional testing to identify optimum
parameter range for each material, and then impose
restrictions so that results of total processing fall
within that range for each material

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Issue 8: Integrity of Long-Term Creep-Rupture Data


Extrapolations for CSEF Steels

Problem: The creep-rupture behavior of the CSEF Steels


appears to be more sensitive to the effects of
temperature and stress within certain operating
ranges then traditional Cr-Mo steels, such as A1
Grade 22.

Question of validity of the LM constant of 30-35 at


lower stresses
Lowering of allowable stresses for certain grades

Solution: Continual re-evaluation of data as longer-term tests


are concluded to verify reasonableness of
extrapolations.

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Major Reduction in Allowable Stresses for Grade


122 Based on Test Data Misinterpretation

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Issue 9: Elastic Follow-Up


Problem: The Mixing of CSEF Steels and Traditional Low
Alloy Steels in a Piping System Can Result in the
Application of a Non-Diminishing Secondary
Stress (sic) at Dissimilar Metal Joints, i.e. Elastic
Follow-Up.
Solution: a). Control Relative Proportion of CSEF Steels
and Traditional Low Alloy Steels That Can Be
Used in a Given Piping System.
b). Require that Secondary Stress Resulting from
Elastic Follow-Up Be Treated as a Primary Stress.

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Background Information
Main Steamline Piping:

18 (457mm) OD, Sch. 140 (1.562 (40mm) NWT);


SA-335, Grade 91 Material

Stop/Control Valve:

1.25Cr/1.0Mo/0.25V Material;
Thickness at Connection ~ 3 (~75 mm)

Filler Metal:

2-1/4Cr-1Mo (B3)

Design Outlet Steam Temp: 1050F (565 C)


Design Outlet Steam Press: 1800 psi (12.4 Mpa)

Total Hours of Service:

< 5000

No Cold Spring Incorporated Into Piping System During Erection


Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Through-Wall Cracking Appearance on the


OD Surface of the Joint

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Illustrating the Path of Fracture Along the


Weld Fusion Boundary

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

The Path of Fracture Through the


Decarburized Zone in the Weld Metal

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Creep-Induced Cavitation and Microfissuring


Ahead of the Main Fracture

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Leitz Miniload Hardness Tester 500 g

HARDNESS VALUES - HV
Quarter Point

HAZ

Carbon Depleted Zone Weld Metal

12 oclock
6 oclock

296, 301, 301, 307

324, 324, 336

216, 219, 230

290, 307, 301, 312, 318

336, 356

223, 237, 230

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Original Joint Geometry

Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Secondary Creep Strain Accumulation


1.E-01

Grade 91
Grade 22 & 1.25Cr-Mo-V

1.E-02

Grade 22, Decarb HAZ

Creep rate (abs/h)

1.E-03

Grade 22 - Exp Data


Grade 91 - Exp Data

1.E-04

1.E-05

1.E-06

1.E-07

1.E-08
1

10

100

Stress (ksi)

Illustrating Differences In The Rate Of Secondary Creep Strain


Accumulation Between Grades 91 And 22 At 1050F (565 C)
(Curve For Grade 91 Developed At Temperature of 1067F
(575C) - All Others At 1050F (565 C))
Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006

Results Of Limited Structural Analysis


1. Root cause of cracking unidentified
2. Axial stress across decarburized zone a
significant factor
3. Piping support system satisfactory primary and
secondary stresses below Code limits
4. Thermal transients played no significant role in
the failure
5. Effect of elastic follow-up (i.e., lack of significant
creep relaxation in Grade 91, following start-up)
likely critical in creating highly axial stress, and
requires further investigation
Lesson 6
IIW-AWS
January/February 2006