316LN and 800
316LN and 800
316LN and 800
www.elsevier.com/locate/msea
a
Department of Metallurgical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Madras 600 036, India
Materials Technology Di6ision, Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam 603 102, India
Abstract
For joining type 316LN austenitic stainless steel to modified 9Cr 1Mo steel for power plant application, a trimetallic
configuration using an insert piece (such as alloy 800) of intermediate thermal coefficient of expansion (CTE) has been sometimes
suggested for bridging the wide gap in CTE between the two steels. Two joints are thus involved and this paper is concerned with
the weld between 316LN and alloy 800. These welds were produced using three types of filler materials: austenitic stainless steels
corresponding to 316, 16Cr8Ni2Mo, and the nickel-base Inconel 1821. The weld fusion zones and the interfaces with the base
materials were characterised in detail using light and transmission electron microscopy. The 316 and Inconel 182 weld metals
solidified dendritically, while the 1682 (16%Cr8%Ni 2%Mo) weld metal showed a predominantly cellular substructure. The
Inconel weld metal contained a large number of inclusions when deposited from flux-coated electrodes, but was relatively
inclusion-free under inert gas-shielded welding. Long-term elevated-temperature aging of the weld metals resulted in embrittling
sigma phase precipitation in the austenitic stainless steel weld metals, but the nickel-base welds showed no visible precipitation,
demonstrating their superior metallurgical stability for high-temperature service. 2000 Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Type 316LN; Austenitic stainless steel; Power plant application
1. Introduction
Dissimilar metal welds between ferritic steel and
austenitic steel tubing and piping are commonly employed in fossil fuel fired power plants and gas cooled
and liquid metal cooled fast breeder reactors. Such
transition joints are necessary because the austenitic
stainless steels with superior creep strength and oxidation resistance are required in the higher temperature
regions such as superheaters and reheaters, while creepresisting ferritic steels such as 2.25Cr 1Mo or 9Cr
1Mo steels are commercially more attractive for the
lower temperature primary boiler and heat exchanger
sections. The early use of austenitic stainless steel consumables for these joints led to several problems during
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +91-44-4458598; fax: + 91-442350509.
E-mail address: ssundar@acer.iitm.ernet.in (S. Sundaresan).
1
Inconel and Inco-weld are registered trademarks of the Inco
group of companies.
0921-5093/00/$ - see front matter 2000 Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 9 2 1 - 5 0 9 3 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 9 6 9 - 2
75
Table 1
Chemical composition of materials used, wt.%
Base materials
Element
316LN
Alloy 800
316
16-8-2
Inconel 182
Inconel 82
C
Si
Mn
Ni
Cr
Mo
Ti
Nb
Fe
0.02
0.3
1.8
12.1
17.9
2.4
Balance
0.09
0.7
1.0
31.8
19.9
0.36
Balance
0.052
0.6
1.7
11.5
18.6
2.2
0.04
0.01
Balance
0.07
1.5
8.8
16.2
1.6
Balance
0.05
0.5
7
69
15
0.1
2
Balance
0.015
0.1
2.8
72.6
19.6
0.37
2.68
Balance
For prolonging the life of the transition joints another approach involving the use of a trimetallic
configuration has been suggested; this uses an insert
piece made of a material having a CTE intermediate
between those of the ferritic and austenitic steels. The
more gradual variation in CTE results in a lowering of
stresses during fluctuations in service temperature [7].
Among the materials which can be contemplated for
the insert piece, alloy 800 has been found to be the
most attractive on account of its excellent creep and
oxidation resistance, in addition to an appropriate CTE
[8].
In the present work, a trimetallic transition joint has
been investigated involving modified 9Cr 1Mo steel
(designated as P91/T91) and 316LN austenitic stainless
steel as the base materials and alloy 800 as the intermediate piece. Two joints are thus necessary: one between
P91 and alloy 800 and the other between alloy 800 and
316LN. The present paper is concerned with welds
produced for the alloy 800/316LN joint.
Several types of filler materials can be considered for
these joints including iron-base and nickel-base alloys.
King et al. [7] compared various austenitic filler materials corresponding to types 309, 312, 347 and 1682
(16%Cr8%Ni2%Mo). The main problem encountered in these welds was solidification cracking, to
which type 347 was the most susceptible and 1682
the least. While type 312 exhibited little hot cracking,
the deposit had a high delta ferrite content which was
not acceptable because of possible embrittling precipitations during service. Bhaduri et al. [9,10] made a comparative evaluation of 16 8 2 and Inconel 82/182
consumables for joining alloy 800 to type 304 stainless
steel. They found that Inconel 82/182 displayed a
higher tendency for microfissuring than 16 82 but
was superior in all-weld tensile testing over a range of
temperatures. However, transverse tensile tests showed
that the joints with 16 8 2 filler were only marginally
inferior. Additionally, 16 8 2 provided a more satisfactory transition in CTE. It was therefore concluded
that 1682 should be preferred for the joint.
In optimizing the choice of transition piece and welding consumables, factors other than thermal expansion
characteristics and weldability must also be considered.
76
2. Experimental work
77
Fig. 4. (A) Microstructure of 1682 weld metal. (B) Region near root of 16 8 2 weld metal showing retained ferrite. (C) Region near 1682
weld metal/316 base metal interface showing retained ferrite.
78
Fig. 5. (A) Microstructure of Inconel 82 weld metal. (B) Microstructure of Inconel 182 weld metal.
79
dilution. This zone is clearly seen in the higher magnification micrograph Fig. 6B.
The microstructure of the interface between 316 fusion zone-Alloy 800 heat-affected zone (Fig. 6C) shows
extensive grain boundary melting and liquation. The
partially melted zone on this side of the joint appears to
be much wider than on the 316LN side, as also the zone
of austenitic grain coarsening. As mentioned earlier, the
base metal microstructure of the alloy 800 consisted of
large elongated grains present as a result of incomplete
recrystallisation during hot deformation. In the HAZ,
these grains have recrystallised into a fine equiaxed
grain structure that is found close to the fusion
boundary. Even this recrystallised zone, however, has a
much coarser grain structure when compared with the
HAZ of the 316LN. Further, a well-defined partially
Fig. 6. (A) Interface between 316 weld metal and 316LN base metal showing unmixed zone (arrowed). (B) Higher magnification micrograph of
316 weld metal and 316LN base metal interface revealing unmixed zone (arrowed) with higher ferrite content. (C) Microstructure of interface
between 316 weld metal and alloy 800 base metal showing unmixed zone (arrowed).
80
81
Fig. 9. (A) Microstructure of 316 weld metal after aging for 100 h at 750C showing sigma phase precipitation (arrowed). (B) Microstructure of
16 8 2 weld metal after aging for 100 h at 750C showing sigma phase precipitation (arrowed). (C) Transmission electron micrograph of 316 weld
metal showing sigma phase (arrowed). (D) Microstructure of Inconel 182 weld metal after aging showing absence of precipitation.
82
4. Summary
Weld joints between 316LN austenitic stainless steel
and alloy 800 can be made with either stainless steel or
nickel-alloy filler material. The 16 8 2 weld metal with
the lowest solute content exhibits a cellular substructure, which was shown in a related study [18] to be
associated with a high resistance to solidification cracking. The Inconel and type 316 weld fusion zones, on the
other hand, solidify with more pronounced dendritic
branching and are more susceptible to hot cracking.
The Inconel weld metal, when deposited from fluxcoated electrodes, reveals a higher inclusion content
than under gas-shielded welding; this results in lower
ductility and toughness in the former case. High-tem.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the Board of Research in Nuclear
Sciences, Department of Atomic Energy, for the financial support provided for the work.
References
[1] C.D. Lundin, Weld. J. 61 (2) (1982) 58s.
[2] R. Viswanathan, Proc. AWS/EPRI Conf. Joining Dissimilar
Metals, Pittsburg, PA (1982), pp. 7.
[3] K.G.K. Murti, S. Sundaresan, Weld. J. 64 (12) (1985) 329s.
[4] A.T. Price, CEGB experience with small diameter dissimilar
metal welds in coal fired boilers, in Proc. AWS/EPRI Conf.
Joining Dissimilar Metals, Pittsburg, PA, 1982, pp. 4879.
[5] P.E. Haas, Results of industry wide survey on dissimilar metal
weld performance, in Proc. AWS/EPRI Conf. Joining Dissimilar
Metals, Pittsburgh, PA, 1982, pp. 37 47.
[6] R.D. Nicholson, Metals Technol. 11 (3) (1984) 115.
[7] J.F. King, M.D. Sullivan, G.M. Slaughter, Weld. J. 56 (11)
(1977) 354s.
[8] W.B. Jones, R.M. Allen, Metall. Trans. A 13A (1982) 637.
[9] K. Bhaduri, I. Gowrisankar, V. Seetharaman, S. Venkadesan, P.
Rodriguez, Mater. Sci. Technol. 4 (11) (1988) 1020.
[10] A.K. Bhaduri, S. Venkadesan, P. Rodriguez, Intl. J. Pres. Ves.
Pip. 58 (1994) 251.
[11] PFBR/32040/SP/1002/R-0-Prototype Fast Breeder Reactor specification for the qualification of the welding consumables as
proposed by IGCAR, Kalpakkam, India.
[12] Lippold, Weld. J. 62 (1) (1983) 1s.
[13] P.G. Stone, J. Orr, J.C. Guest, in: S.F. Pugh (Ed.), Proceedings
of a BNES Conference, AERE Harwell, Oxfordshire, 1974, p.
15.
[14] H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, S.A. David, J.M. Vitek, Mater. Sci. Technol. 7 (1) (1991) 50.
[15] N. Suutala, Metall. Trans. A 14A (2) (1983) 191.
[16] W.F. Savage, E.F. Nippes, J.S. Erickson, Weld. J. 55 (1976)
213s.
[17] G.J. Davies, J.G. Garland, Int. Mater. Rev. 20 (1975) 83.
[18] M. Sireesha, S.K. Albert, V. Shankar, S. Sundaresan, J. Nuclear
Mater. 279 (2000) 65.
[19] W.F. Savage, C.D. Lundin, A.H. Aronson, Weld. J. 44 (4)
(1965) 175s.
[20] E. Folkhard, Welding Metallurgy of Stainless Steels, Springer
Verlag, New York, 1988.
[21] W.A. Baeslack, J.C. Lippold, W.F. Savage, Weld. J. 58 (6)
(1979) 168s.
[22] J.C. Lippold, Weld. J. 62 (1) (1983) 1s.
[23] K. Saito, M. Aoki, H. Kondo, Trans. ISIJ 27 (1987) 580.
[24] S.K. Albert, T.P.S. Gill, A.K. Tyagi, S.L. Mannan, S.D. Kulkarni, P. Rodriguez, Weld. J. 76 (3) (1997) 135s.
[25] S. Duvall, W.A. Owczarski, Weld. J. 47 (3) (1968) 115s.
[26] T.W. Nelson, J.C. Lippold, M.J. Mills, Sci. Technol. Weld. Join.
3 (5) (1998) 249.
[27] J.O. Nilsson, B. Lundquist, M. Lonnberg, Weld. J. 73 (1) (1994)
45.