21 Oct 04 10:51 Hello all! We are condidering the possibility of using welded alloy pipe A691 P91 Cl.

42 in a hot reheat system (30 bar, 575C) instead of semaless A335 P91 pipe. Manufacturer tell us that all its properties after normalized and tempering are the same than seamless pipe but we are not very sure. We have heard some things about creep properties of Heat Affected Zone that don't sound very well. Any comment or recommendation? Best regards, davefitz (Mechanical) Without the N+T the weld creep strength reduction factor is about 0.6. The N+T needs to be conducted correctly to ensure this alloy has full assumed creep strength, including that the rate of cooldown from 1800 F be faster than -5 F/sec ( to be confirmed ) to ensure formation of martensite. The QC should include a micro-hardness traverse of the weld HAZ to confirm no soft zone exists after N+T, and other tests may be needed to ensure no cracking exists ( photo micrographs). The weld area will still have different creep properties than the parent metal, since the weld electrode composition is different than theparetn metal, and ther is likely to be a detectable pre-existing shrink line at the ID if the weld. Usually large hot reheat pipes are large enough that a worker can crawl inside and grind away gross defects. carletes (Chemical) 21 Oct 04 11:29 Dear davefitz, So in your opinion a welded P91 pipe with a correct N+T can substitute a seamless pipe? I thought so, but, surprisingly, ASME B31.1 permits the use of A691 pipe for non-bolier external piping but not in the case of bolier external piping (ASME I)when the design conditions are the same. Strange? Thanks davefitz (Mechanical) 21 Oct 04 11:17

carletes (Chemical)

21 Oct 04 14:25 From what I have seen of the shops that fab and weld P91 piping in the USA, there is a big question as to whether they could be expected to treat this material properly- there is a significant risk that the average shop would make some error. Very few of these shops have a staff metalurgist that is familiar with P91, and simply following ASME rules is not adequate for P91. I would not use a creep weld strength reduction factor greater than 0.6 unless every aspect of the fab was reviewed and approved by a metalurgist that knows P91 inside and out. davefitz (Mechanical) 30 Dec 04 14:51 See the latest paper published by the ASME section II committee on materials " Issues of concern to ASME BPV committee TG on creep-strength enhanced ferritic steels , and remedies under consideration" by J Henry, M Gold(chairman), and J Tanzosh. Basically , the ASME code had assumed that the users, fabricators, and engineers would retain in-house metallurgists that would assume technical responsibility for understanding how to fabricate these alloys. The corpoate downsizing of the 80's and 90's led to a dumbing down of the technical expertise, such that correct fabrication of P91 /T23/P911/P92/P122 is the exception, and not the rule.

New rules being proposed are: a) inital qualifying heats submitted for code acceptance must inlcude samples at both ends of the alloying range ( lean and rich) for testing b)redefining the normalizing and tempering temperatures ,, and define what operations will requrie a N+T ( ie ,hot bending) c)define the PWHT temp based on Ni + Mn content d) define max coldwork permitted without heat treatment e)define a broad harness range that, if it is nto met, would then require further testing to ensure correct crystal sructure. f)worry about SCC, and keep part dry between welding and PWHT g)define a tempering parameter, and a range of acceptable values to qualify a part for hi-temp service. Implicit is the need to monitor and archive ALL time vs temp histories of the P91 parts during fabrication. This montoring by itself willbe a big improvement in QC- we normally see these cucrves provided if teh part is forged overseas, but it does not seem to be done by domestic foundries. Basically, they will finally read the Mannesman + Vallourec P91 book and follow those recommendations ( which were available circa 1990). DSB123 (Mechanical) 1 Jan 05 8:28 davefitz, Yet again you have provided good info as regards P91 piping materials. I have a copy of the Mannesman+Vallourec P91 book and it is interesting reading. There seems to be so much that can go wrong with this material if QA is not 100% that it gives me real concern on a system that has recently been installed in our power station. One contractor wanted a modified A335 material with specific Al and Ni limits whereas the other Contractor did not and specified A335 material. Both had different heat treatment procedures (i.e. temperatures, soak times,etc). So we ended up with a system which is not consistent in its final condition but each says it's O.K. Where can I get a copy of the paper you quote? davefitz (Mechanical) 4 Jan 05 11:22 dsb123: The paper was presented at the summer 2004 PVP conference. The authors can send you a copy. I had asked ASME to post the paper on their website at <www.asme.org> , but no reply yet on that front. athomas236 (Mechanical) 6 Jan 05 15:56 I tried today to find the paper in davefitz post dated 30 Dec 04 on the ASME web site but could not find it, so probably not there yet. I read the second paragraph of davefitz post dated 30 Dec 04. If ASME did make the assumption as stated then this clearly was a serious mistake not only for US based suppliers and fabricators but also for the fact that ASME is an internationally recognised national code that is widely used around the world. At the moment my company is invoved with 3 projects involving 10-12 HRSGs that use P91 extensively. On one project we are about to start site welding of main steam piping in P91 which leaves me

wandering what to do about this potential problem. athomas236 davefitz (Mechanical) 7 Jan 05 7:37 athomas236: You can get the paper from the authors, or thru the ASME via the papers presented at the 2004 PVP conference. Apparently Eng-tips will not allow posting of e-mail addresses or faxes anymore, but the first author works for Alstom in Chatanooga Tennesee, the second works at Gold Metallurgical servicees,LLC in North Benton, Ohio, and the third author at B+W in Barberton, Ohio. Our P91 saga continues. Another major P91 faiure detected 2 days ago, a 12" hot reheat riser in the boiler setting. Apparently the fabricator did not meet sectionI fig PG 42.1- the max slope at a weldolet thickness transition should not exceed 30 degrees, but they use a 45 degree thickness transition between a 12" P91 nozzle and 12"x 22"F22 weldolet nozzle saddle.Failure was similar to an earlier failure at the same plant that had a crack int he weld between the P91 HP main steam pipe and the 1.25Cr 1 Mo V turbine stop valve. In both cases, a better desig would have included a PF91 transition piece. Personally, I think the ASME wording on fig PG-42.1 should be reworded to require transition pieces when the 2 components have disparate creep strengths. I am sure a review of all ASME records would show that the rules implied in that figure were based on the use of similar strength materials and the figure cannot be correctly used in the case of dissimilar metals. athomas236 (Mechanical) 7 Jan 05 11:54 davefitz, Thanks for the information, as you say the saga continues. What I have done today is request a copy of the T91/P91 book from Vallourec and Mannesman and asked our library to get a copy of the Summer 2004 PV&P proceedings from the British Lending Library so I can read the paper you mentioned. Our site staff have also been forewarned of the sensitivity of P91 and asked to provide details of the extent of welding supervision on site and copies of the weld, PWHT and QA/QC procedures. I have an action to provide them with more details of the potential problem by early next week so its all getting a bit hectic. athomas236 (Mechanical) 11 Jan 05 6:09 Gentlemen, For your information I have now received the weld procedure spec and procedure qualification record brief details of which are shown below. I am not a welding engineer or metallurgist but I have tried to include information that seems to be important based up on various threads and posts. Weld procedure covers the welding of SA335-P91 to SA335-P91 upto 56mm thick and has been prepared in accordance with ASME 9, 1 and B31.1. Min preheat temp = 204C Max interpass temp = 330C Preheat temperature is maintained during welding PWHT temperature range 710-750C If thickness <= 50mm hold time is min of 2 hours. If thickness > 50mm hold time is min of 3 hours Note says that continuous or special heating where applicable should be recorded.

Filler metal AWS class ER90S-B9(solid) for first GTAW weld runs and E9016-B9 for other SMAW weld runs. No hardness measurements specified. The procedure qualification was made on a 28mm thick pipe with base and filler metal as procedure specification. Preheat temp = 202C Max interpass temp = 274C Preheat temperature is maintained during welding PWHT temperature range 718-720C with hold time of 2 hours 10mins. Temperature history was recorded. Tensile ans bend tests described as satisfactory and Brinell hardnesses were: Base 103 to 143 HAZ 122 to 177 Weld 159 to 183 Naturally I would pleased to receive any comments. athomas236

athomas236 (Mechanical) Gentlemen,

14 Jan 05 4:34

Thanks to the good advice from davefitz I have been able to obtain copies of the draft abstract and paper called Issues of concern to ASME B&PV Committee TG etc. athomas236 davefitz (Mechanical) 14 Jan 05 8:14 athomas236: Is there specified a requirement to cool the weld to 100C prior to PWHT ( this is to ensure complete transformatin to martensite prior to PWHT ? athomas236 (Mechanical) 14 Jan 05 9:42 davefitz I am still studying the paper and at the same time preparing a document for our site team to use in discussions with the contractor. When I have finished I will post a summary in this thread. At the moment I have not yet identified such a requirement. regards athomas236 athomas236 (Mechanical) davefitz,

15 Jan 05 9:44

With regard to your question of 14 Jan 05, there is a statement at the end of the section on PWHT that says. "In is anticipated that action regarding rules that would require cooling to some minimum temperature below the pre-heat temperature prior to PWHT will be considered when more definitive data is available." athomas236 davefitz (Mechanical) 17 Jan 05 7:26 athomas236: I think the report is trying to be diplomatic instead of technically rigorous. Sme fabricators find that there is a savings in labor by conducting PWHT immediately following welding and do not cool down the piece prio to PWHT. Also, some folks interpret the current code rules as requiring maintenance of preheat unitl after PWHT is completed. IN both cases it is embarassing to admit the past code rules are not optimum for these alloys; they should be cooled down to 100C prior to pwht in order to assure that all (95% +) magnetite is formed prior to PWHT , the alternative is to cause magnetite to form after PWHT and that new magnetite would not be tempered. Also, for that report to suggest that increased testing of as-built ,suspicious , in place pipework (ie, the entire inventory of P91 piping since 1986) would not be prudent sort of suggests an ostrich philosophy. I guess it takes a major accident to wake some folks up. athomas236 (Mechanical) 18 Jan 05 7:13 Further to my post of 14 Jan 05, see in the following posts some notes I have made on P91. The notes are in 7 sections as follows. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Introduction General Code acceptance of ne materials Hot bending PWHT Cold bending Stress corrosion cracking

regards athomas236 athomas236 (Mechanical) 1. Introduction

18 Jan 05 7:15

This note reviews some of the problems of using P91 (X10CrMoVNb9-1) and the methods that could be used to overcome some of these problems where these are available. Although this note concentrates on P91 material, the problems discussed are equally applicable to other creep enhanced materials such as P92 (X20CrMoV12-1). The information in this note is taken from: (a) the draft of a paper presented at the 2004, ASME Piping and Pressure Vessel Conference (called the ASME paper in this note) (b) the T91/P91 Book published by Vallourec and Mannesmann (c) ASME B31.1, Power Piping (d) British/European piping code BS EN 13480-Part 4 (e) engineering websites.

athomas236 (Mechanical) 2. General

18 Jan 05 7:16

Grade 91 is a 9%Cr, 1%Mo, V ferritic steel with creep enhanced properties. The material was developed in the USA in the late 1970 s and was included in the ASME Code in 1983/1984. Unlike carbon and low alloy steels, P91 depends for its elevated creep strength on achieving and maintaining a specific microstructure. This specific microstructure is created by the transformation to martensite during cooling. Any event during manufacture, erection or operation that disrupts this microstructure will compromise the integrity of the material and prevent it from achieving the creep properties upon which the Code allowable stresses are based. In such cases the premature failure of such components is unavoidable. In each of the following sections each of the problems with P91 materials is reviewed together with possible solutions, where these are available. athomas236 (Mechanical) 18 Jan 05 7:18 3. Code acceptance of new materials (a) The problem

Any material supplier that wants a new material included in the Code has to provide details of the mechanical properties from three batches of the material and make recommendations regarding the specified compositional ranges of the major alloying elements. For creep enhanced materials, the microstructure is sensitive to changes in composition. So if the specified ranges are wider than those of the batches upon which the mechanical properties are based then it is possible for a subsequent batches of material to fall within the specified ranges but not have the mechanical properties upon which the Code allowable stresses are based. Although not mentioned in the ASME paper, it is clear that the information provided by the material supplier will refer to the parent material itself and not to any weld that may be made in the parent material. So any degradation in base material properties caused by welding may not be recognised in the Code allowable stresses. The same would apply if the weld filler metal has poorer creep properties than the parent metal. (b) The solution

The solution proposed in the ASME paper is that Code specified compositional ranges should not be significantly wider than the three batches upon which the Code allowable stresses have been determined. The paper does not state the compositional ranges of the three batches of P91 on which the Code allowable stresses are based. Without this information, it is not possible to establish if the composition of the P91 pipes currently being installed at ??? project are in accord with those on which the Code allowable stresses are based. athomas236 (Mechanical) 18 Jan 05 7:20 4. Hot bending (a) The problem

As previously mentioned P91 depends on a specific microstructure for its elevated creep strength properties. Any thermal process such as inter-critical heat treatment or tempering that changes the

microstructure could substantially reduce the creep strength so that it approaches, in the worst case, that of 2 %Cr, 1%Mo. (Note: Inter-critical heat treatment is heating of the material into the temperature range where the microstructure begins to transform from ferrite to austenite. During heating, this process of transformations starts at the lower critical temperature and is completed by the upper critical temperature.)

(b)

The solution

Recommendations are before the Code committees to ensure that if it is necessary to normalise and temper P91 material then this process is carried out in the most appropriate temperature ranges. The temperature ranges recommended for normalising and tempering are 1040-1080C and 730-800C respectively. There is a recommendation in the ASME paper that if any pipe component is heated locally above 800C then the component should be re-normalised and tempered in a manner that will eliminate the zones that have been heated into the inter-critical range. (c) Other issues

ASME B31.1, clause 129.3.1 requires that hot bending/forming should be carried out at a temperature above the lower critical temperature minus 56C, i.e. approximately 754C. The ASME paper says that significant reductions in creep strength can occur if P91 is exposed to temperatures of the lower critical temperature minus 28C, i.e. approximately 782C. Therefore, to comply with B31.1 and prevent reductions in creep strength while avoiding the need to renormalise and temper means hot bending should be carried out in the temperature ranges 754-782C. If this temperature range were selected for hot bending then practical difficulties are expected in maintaining the material temperatures within this range. There is the complication that the lower critical temperature is dependent upon material composition which will vary from batch to batch. It is understood that hot bending is usually carried in the range 750-950C. B31.1, clause 129.3.3(A) states only that any post-hot bending/forming heat treatment should be specified by the designer. There have been cases in the USA when bends that were formed at 1090C have not been re-normalised and tempered. If view of the above, we should require all hot bends should be re-normalised and tempered and that the necessary records should be provided to confirm that this has been carried out. This agrees with the requirements stated in the T91/P91 Book. In the case of ??? project, we should request details of hot bending procedures together with details of any subsequent heat treatment. athomas236 (Mechanical) 18 Jan 05 7:25 5. Post weld heat treatment (PWHT) (a) The problem

Research has shown that the upper and lower critical temperatures (together with the start and finish

temperatures for martensite formation during cooling) are significantly affected by the manganese and nickel contents. The higher the manganese and nickel contents the lower these temperatures. P91 material has a specified maximum nickel content of 0.4% whereas the applicable AWS specification for weld filler metal has nickel content up to 1%. The concern is that the high nickel content of the filler metal in combination with the effect on the critical temperatures could result in the incorrect microstructure being present in the welds. The effects of this are expected to be a reduction in the long term creep strength. (b) The solution

Recommendations are before the Code committees to change the requirements for PWHT. The PWHT requirements before Code committees are:

%(Mu + Ni)

%Ni

Max Temp C

?1.5 774 <1.5 but ?1.0 >0.4 774 <1.5 but ?1.0 ?0.4 788 <1.0 ?0.4 800 <1.0 >0.4 788 The PWHT requirements in B31.1 are: Holding temperature Holding time t ? 50 mm t > 50 mm 700-760C

2 hours 2 hours plus 15 min per 25 mm over 50 mm

It is evident that the B31.1 PWHT requirements and those in the ??? project weld procedure are completely different to those being considered by the Code committees. This is a matter that clearly needs to be resolved with the contractor. (c) Other issues

In the ASME paper it is stated that requirements for cooling below the preheat temperature before PWHT will be considered when definitive data is available. B31.1 says that after commencing welding, preheat temperature shall be maintained until PWHT is carried out. This requirement of B31.1 is not mentioned in the Umm Al Nar weld procedure. There is evidence that after welding P91 should be cooled to 100C before PWHT to achieve the required microstructure. In Table 9.14.1-1 of the British/European piping code BS/EN 13480-Part 4, states that welds in P91 materials should be cooled before PWHT to produce transformation to martensite. There are, however, no details of how this should be done in terms of temperatures or cooling rates. The recommendation to cool to 100C before PWHT is also included in the T91/P91 Book.

We should require all welds to be cooled in accordance with BS EN 13480-Part 4. In addition, the necessary records should be provided to confirm that this has been carried out. For ??? project, this is a matter that needs to be resolved with the contractor because the weld procedure does not include any requirement for cooling or the maintenance of preheat temperatures prior to PWHT. athomas236 (Mechanical) 6. Cold bending (a) The problem 18 Jan 05 7:27

Any cold working such as cold bending affects the microstructure of the material. The greater the cold working, the greater the effect on the microstructure. There is a level of cold working that will cause significant reductions in the materials rupture strength. (b) The solution

ASME is considering placing a limit on the extent of cold working above which it will be necessary to renormalise and temper. Based on available data the likely limit for P91 is 15-20% (or less). B31.1, clause 129.3.3, requires all cold formed bends to be heat treated (in accordance with requirements for PWHT) if the pipe is 4 inch or larger or has a thickness of 0.5 inch or greater. The British/European piping code BS EN 13480-Part 4 requires heat treatment as shown below. Mean bend radius Pipe OD Heat treatment ? 1.3 OD All Required > 1.3 OD but < 2.5 OD ? 142 mm Not required > 1.3 OD but < 2.5 OD > 142 mm Required ? 2.5 OD All Not required If view of the above, we should require all cold bends should be re-normalised and tempered in accordance with BS EN 13480-Part 4 except that 142 mm should be replaced with 100 mm. In addition, the necessary records should be provided to confirm that this has been carried out. In the case of ??? project, we should request details of cold bend procedures together with details of the subsequent heat treatment athomas236 (Mechanical) 18 Jan 05 7:29 7. Stress corrosion cracking (a) The problem

There is evidence that welds in P91 material may be susceptible to stress corrosion cracking. (b) The solution

The ASME paper recommends that when P91 has been welded the components should be kept completely dry until PWHT is carried out.

The T91/P91 Book recommends that the maximum period between welding and PWHT should be one week and that during this period the components should be kept dry. The weld procedure for ??? project does not mention this requirement which should be clarified with the contractor. davefitz (Mechanical) 18 Jan 05 8:16 Don't forget : the rate of cooling following normalization at 1900 F must be faster than -9F/min in order to avoid formation of ferrite. See the TTT curves for this alloy. athomas236 (Mechanical) 18 Jan 05 11:02 Thanks athomas236 (Mechanical) 9 Feb 05 20:44 Well we had a response from the contractor today. He says all piping is completely and wholey in accordance with B31.1. If we want to consider other requirements such as presented at the 2004 ASME P&PV conference or the T91 Vallourec and Mannesmann Book we should issue a variation to the contract. Promises to be an interesting time over the next few months. athomas236 MEMO4EVER (Mechanical) 12 Sep 05 8:17 what is the ideal fabrication & Erection Methode for A335-P91 Pipes (High alloy steel pipes)? And how could i weld these pipes?

Welding "Grade 91" Alloy Steel

This information is provided by Sperko Engineering based on information currently possessed by Sperko Engineering; Sperko Engineering accepts no responsibility for proper application of this information or for any consequential damages associated with application of this information.

Sperko Engineering Services, Inc. September 2002, Page 1 of 1 One of the materials that has spread through the piping and boiler industry recently is an alloy, referred to in various specifications as T-91, P-91, F-91 and Grade 91. This is a specially modified and heat treated 9% chromium, 1% Molybdenum, Vanadium enhanced (9Cr-1MoV) steel that performs quite well at elevated temperature usually 1000rF and higher. It was first used in the mid-1980s and has picked up steam since then. If you are going to weld or fabricate Grade 91 alloys, beware! These are not your fathers chrome-moly steels!

Development of Grade 91 began in 1978 by Oak Ridge National Labs for the breeder reactor and further developed by other researchers since then. Other grades such as grade 92 and grade 911 (who says metallurgists dont have a sense of humor?) are also under development. Since P/T-91 is modified with vanadium, nickel, aluminum, niobium and nitrogen, it develops very high hardness. Tramp residual elements in this steel, such as phosphorous, sulfur, lead, tin, copper, antimony and other elements will segregate to the grain boundaries during solidification of the weld, and, since the weld metal is very hard, it will crack quite easily. It is, therefore, very important to use low residual filler metal. For SMAW, E9015-B9 electrodes are preferred. EXX15 type electrodes have no extra iron powder in the coating like EXX18 electrodes, eliminating one source of contaminants. Stay away from E9018B9 electrodes when welding Grade 91 steels unless the supplier can guarantee that the weld metal has low tramp residuals. If you routinely get crater cracks (also known as solidification anomalies and rogue weld metal), the filler is not low in residuals and you should send it back (or at least get some good stuff). Look carefully for crater cracks, and keep in mind that one batch of electrodes from a manufacturer may crack and another batch not crack. Two trade names of electrodes and filler that have low residuals are Metrode Chromet 9B9 electrode and Euroweld 9CrMoV wire. The wire is suitable for GTAW, GMAW and SAW (with a suitable flux, such as Lincoln MIL800H, Lincoln 882, Thyssen Marathon 543, Bavaria-Schweisstechnik WP380 and Oerlikon OP 76). Welding Grade 91 using FCAW requires even more care since many FCAW wires do not provide adequate toughness at 70F (the lowest hydrostatic test temperature permitted by ASME); the only FCAW wire that consistently provides more than 20 Ft-lbs absorbed energy at 70F is Metrodes Supercore F91. The above electrodes and filler metals are available from stock at Euroweld at 1-704-662-3993 or www.euroweld.com. The performance of Grade 91 welds depends entirely on having the correct chemical analysis in the weld metal; therefore, it is highly recommended that filler metals be purchased with test reports

showing actual chemical analysis for the specific heat/lot combination that one has purchased. In addition, a minimum carbon content of 0.09%, a minimum niobium content of 0.03%, (although slightly lower Niobium can be accepted with flux cored wire since titanium is an effective substitute for Niobium) and a minimum nitrogen of 0.02% should be specified to ensure adequate creep strength in the weld metal.. In addition, the sum of Mn + Ni should not exceed 1.5%. Manganese and nickel depress the lower transformation temperature, and as it exceeds 1.5%, the transformation temperature drops below 1450F, narrowing the range in which heat treatment can be done safely. In addition, the Mf temperature goes down, increasing the possibility of retained austenite after PWHT. When using SAW, a basic flux is preferred since other flux types will burn out carbon and permit elevated oxygen and nitrogen levels reducing the strength and toughness of the weld metal. Since this is a highly-hardenable alloy, it is subject to hydrogen cracking. Purchase of E9015-B9-H4 electrode is recommended. The H4 designation indicates that the electrode exhibits less than 4 ml of hydrogen per 100 grams of weld metal. This is truly a very low hydrogen electrode exactly what is best for welding highly-hardenable steel like Grade 91. Even with diffusible hydrogen control of the electrodes, it is recommended that the electrodes be stored in heated portable rod boxes at the welding location rather than just distributed in the normal fashion. SAW wire/flux combinations and FCAW wire should be ordered with -H4 designations also, although FCAW wire may not be available except as H-8. Preheat and interpass temperature are very important. A range of 400 to 550rF is recommended, After welding is completed, the joint should be allowed to cool slowly to at least 200F after welding is completed to be sure that all the austenite has been transformed to martensite prior to postweld heat treatment (PWHT). If this is not done, there is risk of martensite formation after PWHT; this will result in hard, brittle welds. For the metallurgists out there, the Mf temperature is above 212F, varying some with the grain size.

The welding technique is also important. Since a wide, flat bead is best, a slight weave technique and high travel speed should be specified. Ropy beads are bad since tall, narrow beads tend to crack. Concave beads should also be avoided, particularly with SAW. Bead thickness should not exceed 1/8 in. for SMAW and FCAW to promote tempering of previous passes. These conditions of welding should specified in the WPS to provide correct guidance to welders, not to give them a hard time. Be sure that your welders have been trained regarding these special requirements and that they comply with them. Finally, postweld heat treatment is required for Grade 91 steels, regardless of what construction codes may permit. The holding range should be 1375 to 1425rF for a minimum of 2 hours. Even on small superheater tubes, a long time at temperature PWHT temperature is necessary to form the required weld structure, to ensure adequate toughness during hydrostatic testing and to ensure adequate service life. The lower transformation temperature can be as low as 1450F; if this temperature is exceeded during PWHT, the weld should be allowed to cool to below 200F followed by reheat treating or the condition of the joints should be evaluated by hardness testing. Refer to AWS D10.10, Recommended Practice for Local Heating of Welds in Piping and Tubing, for excellent direction on locating and attachment of thermocouples, the extent of insulation needed, heating coils arrangement, etc. if local heating (preheat, postweld baking, PWHT, etc) is going to be done. After PWHT, the weld hardness should be in the range of 200 to 275. Hardness up to 300 Brinnell may be accepted, but any hardness over 300 is an indication of inadequate PWHT. SMAW and SAW weld metal will exhibit higher hardness when compared to GTAW and FCAW. Hardness below 175 indicates overheating of the joint, and such joints should either be replaced or the part should be normalized and tempered. Do not perform hardness tests that will leave deep impressions in the surface of thin tubes. When performing hardness tests, it is important to prepare the surface properly, particularly for HAZ readings. Since the base metal may have a layer of decaraburization on the surface, about 1/32 inch

of metal should be removed by grinding, and that should be followed by polishing to a 120 grit finish. This preparation will also make readings more consistent and should also be followed when measuring the hardness of the weld metal. Grade 91 can be hot bent using furnace heating or induction heating between 1600 and 2000F, but the low end of this range is preferred. Pipes that are hot bent should be given a full-furnace normalizing heat treatment at 1900 to 1950F for 30 minutes per inch of wall thickness, air cooled to below 200F and tempered in the PWHT range of 1375 to 1425F for 1 hour per inch of thickness. Cold bent pipe should be given a stress-relieving heat treatment at the above tempering temperature for 15 minutes per inch of wall thickness. Another strange phenomenon with Grade 91 is that it is subject to stress-corrosion cracking in the as-welded condition. The media has not been identified as yet, and it does not happen for several days after the weld has cooled to ambient, but it does happen. Of specific concern is shop-fabricated
This information is provided by Sperko Engineering based on information currently possessed by Sperko Engineering; Sperko Engineering accepts no responsibility for proper application of this information or for any consequential damages associated with application of this information.