Optimal Hardness of P91 Weldments

M AT E

R I A L

N
LICE

SED

WARNING: Please read the License Agreement on the back cover before removing the Wrapping Material.

Effective December 6, 2006, this report has been made publicly available in accordance with Section 734.3(b)(3) and published in accordance with Section 734.7 of the U.S. Export Administration Regulations. As a result of this publication, this report is subject to only copyright protection and does not require any license agreement from EPRI. This notice supersedes the export control restrictions and any proprietary licensed material notices embedded in the document prior to publication.

Technical Report

F F

Optimal Hardness of P91 Weldments

1004702

Interim Report, March 2003

EPRI Project Managers A. McGehee K. Coleman

EPRI 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 USA 800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com www.epri.com

DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES

THIS DOCUMENT WAS PREPARED BY THE ORGANIZATION(S) NAMED BELOW AS AN ACCOUNT OF WORK SPONSORED OR COSPONSORED BY THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, THE ORGANIZATION(S) BELOW, NOR ANY PERSON ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM: (A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS DOCUMENT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USER'S CIRCUMSTANCE; OR (B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS DOCUMENT. ORGANIZATION THAT PREPARED THIS DOCUMENT EPRI

ORDERING INFORMATION
Requests for copies of this report should be directed to EPRI Orders and Conferences, 1355 Willow Way, Suite 278, Concord, CA 94520, (800) 313-3774, press 2 or internally x5379, (925) 609-9169, (925) 609-1310 (fax). Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. EPRI. ELECTRIFY THE WORLD is a service mark of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. Copyright 2003 Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. All rights reserved.

CITATIONS
This report was prepared by EPRI Fossil Repair Applications Center 1300 W.T. Harris Blvd. Charlotte, NC 28262 Principal Investigators A. McGehee K. Coleman This report describes research sponsored by EPRI. The report is a corporate document that should be cited in the literature in the following manner: Optimal Hardness of P91 Weldments, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2003. 1004702.

iii

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION

Several premature failures have occurred in Grade 91 (P91) materials due to improper post-weld heat treatment (PWHT). Utilities desire a method to determine whether proper PWHT was performed properly during the construction or repair of a pressure vessel. Methods of performing field hardness measurements to determine the temperature to which the weldment was exposed during PWHT were investigated during this project, including the effect of different levels of hardness on service life. Results & Findings Coupons were prepared using SA 387-Grade 91 material (9Cr-1Mo-V) welded with the shielded metal arc welding (SMAW) process and subjected to PWHT at 1200, 1300, or 1400oF (649, 704, or 760oC) in a heat-treatment oven. Residual-hardness measurements were taken with field hardness measurement instruments and compared to measurements taken with laboratory equipment. Finally, rupture testing of the coupons was performed to determine the effect of hardness on service life. Challenges & Objectives This report was written to provide plant managers, maintenance managers, and power plant engineers with an understanding of how hardness measurements taken with laboratory instruments compare with measurements taken with field instruments. This information would aid in the interpretation of field hardness measurements taken as a method of QA/QC to determine if procedures were followed during the PWHT operation of weldments in P91 materials. By following the methods developed in this report, the service life of installed components can be estimated and premature failures can be minimized. Applications, Values & Use P91 and higher-strength ferritic alloys will continue to see more use in new power plants as temperatures and pressures increase to gain higher efficiency. Methods developed during this project will provide utilities with another tool that can be used to determine if installed piping will meet the predicted life of components using these alloys. EPRI Perspective EPRI has been very instrumental in the development of the Grade 91 alloy in power plants. Investigation of material properties (TR-103617, P91 Steel for Retrofit Headers Material Properties) as well as manufacturing techniques (TR-106856, Properties of Modified 9Cr-1Mo Cast Steel) and repair technologies (1006590, Guideline for Welding P(T)91 Materials) have been developed. Continued work is ongoing to provide utilities with a better-performing material that will enable higher-efficiency power plants and reduced replacement costs. v

Approach This report evaluates different methods of performing in situ field hardness measurements as a way to determine prior PWHT procedures and correlates findings with a potential service life. Different hardness-measurement equipment is evaluated as well as surface preparation requirements. Residual hardness after PWHT to varying temperatures is investigated as well as weldment-rupture properties. Keywords P91 Weld Hardness Pipe Header

vi

EPRI Licensed Material

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
EPRI would like to acknowledge the support of Bhler Thyssen Welding USA for the contribution of welding consumables utilized in this project.

vii

EPRI Licensed Material

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................. 1-1 2 TEST PROGRAM ................................................................................................................ 2-1 Test Materials ..................................................................................................................... 2-1 Base Material ................................................................................................................. 2-1 Weld Metal ..................................................................................................................... 2-2 Mockup Fabrication ............................................................................................................ 2-4 Post-Weld Heat Treatment ................................................................................................. 2-4 Hardness Testing................................................................................................................ 2-6 Micro-Hardness............................................................................................................ 2-10 Rockwell Hardness ...................................................................................................... 2-10 Equo Tip ...................................................................................................................... 2-11 Portable Rockwell Hardness Tester ............................................................................. 2-11 TeleBrineller................................................................................................................. 2-11 Creep Rupture Testing ..................................................................................................... 2-12 3 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................ 3-1 Hardness ............................................................................................................................ 3-1 Rupture Data ...................................................................................................................... 3-4 Failure Characterization...................................................................................................... 3-5 4 DISCUSSIONS..................................................................................................................... 4-1 Rupture Trends................................................................................................................... 4-1 Hardness ............................................................................................................................ 4-1

ix

EPRI Licensed Material

5 CONCLUSIONS................................................................................................................... 5-1 Hardness Versus Rupture Life of P91 Materials ................................................................. 5-1 Hardness Measurement Techniques .................................................................................. 5-1 6 REFERENCES..................................................................................................................... 6-1

EPRI Licensed Material

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2-1 Weld Test Plate...................................................................................................... 2-4 Figure 2-2 Effect of Ni + Mn on the AC1 Temperature............................................................. 2-5 Figure 2-3 Cross-Section Removal for Hardness Evaluation ................................................... 2-6 Figure 2-4 Typical Hardness Indentation Sites on Cross Section ............................................ 2-7 Figure 2-5 Typical Hardness Indentation Sites on Top Surface/Face ...................................... 2-7 Figure 2-6 Vickers Micro-Hardness Machine ........................................................................... 2-8 Figure 2-7 Rockwell Hardness Machine .................................................................................. 2-8 Figure 2-8 Equo Tip................................................................................................................. 2-9 Figure 2-9 Portable Rockwell .................................................................................................. 2-9 Figure 2-10 TeleBrineller ....................................................................................................... 2-10 Figure 2-11 Test Specimen Removal .................................................................................... 2-13 Figure 3-1 Preliminary LMP-Versus-Stress Results for Various PWHT Temperatures ............ 3-5 Figure 3-2 Diagram of Damage Locations Associated With Weldments .................................. 3-6 Figure 3-3 Predicted Failure Locations for P91 Material .......................................................... 3-7 Figure 4-1 Effect of Coarse Grinding on Hardness Readings (Coarse Ground)....................... 4-2 Figure 4-2 Effect of Coarse Grinding on Hardness Readings (Finer Ground) .......................... 4-2

xi

EPRI Licensed Material

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2-1 Chemistry of Base Metal ......................................................................................... 2-1 Table 2-2 Mechanical Properties of Base Metal ...................................................................... 2-2 Table 2-3 Weld Metal Chemistry ............................................................................................. 2-3 Table 2-4 Mechanical Properties of Weld Metal ...................................................................... 2-4 Table 2-5 Test Matrix ............................................................................................................ 2-12 Table 3-1 Hardness Results of 1200F (649C) PWHT ........................................................... 3-1 Table 3-2 Hardness Results of 1300F (704C) PWHT ........................................................... 3-2 Table 3-3 Hardness Results of 1400F (760C) PWHT ........................................................... 3-2 Table 3-4 Summary of Hardness Ranges for Specific PWHTs ................................................ 3-3 Table 3-5 Rupture Hours Data................................................................................................. 3-4

xiii

EPRI Licensed Material

INTRODUCTION

Materials used in the construction of headers and piping in modern power plants are often sold by the pound. In an ever-increasing competitive environment that utilities are faced with today, an effort to save costs by using thinner components has driven the utility industry to use higherstrength materials. Additional benefits are achieved through the use of these stronger materials, including lighter-weight support structures, smaller hangers, and more flexible systems, which are less susceptible to fatigue and damage caused by thermal fatigue. Higher-strength materials often demonstrate more hardenability during welding and forming operations than lower-strength alloy piping and tubing used previously. Weldments required for the fabrication of components are a concern because of this increased hardenability. Welds that are harder than the base metal can act as stress risers or notches and substantially shorten the life of the components subjected to fatigue. They may also demonstrate a substantially different life than the base metal when exposed to high-temperature service. To minimize the hardness mismatch between the weld and the base metal, a post-weld heat treatment (PWHT) is normally performed after completion of the weld and before the component is placed into service. One of the alloys currently being utilized in retrofit applications and new installations is Grade 91 (9Cr-1Mo-V, referred to in this document as P91). This material has seen use in replacement headers and tubing during the last 20 years and is starting to be the material of choice for headers, piping, and tubing in new fossil and combined-cycle plants. Grade 91 demonstrates substantial hardenability as welded. While the hardness of the base material is around 220 Hv, hardness of weldments prior to PWHT can reach 450Hv. To provide good service, these hardness values should be much closer together. Another concern is that the lower critical temperature (AC1) is not exceeded during the PWHT operation [1]. Exceeding the lower critical temperature can substantially reduce the material properties. Current requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Section B31.1 state that the PWHT should be conducted between 1300 and 1400F (704 and 760C). ASME Section states that PWHT should be carried out at a minimum of 1300F (704C). The question is, what tempering temperature provides the best service? Problems have been experienced in some P91 weldments that were later shown to have been caused by residual hardness in the weldments. A method to determine whether proper PWHT was performed after construction or maintenance activities is desired. The proposed method developed by this project is to take field hardness measurements on the surface of piping and correlate the hardness back to an approximate PWHT temperature. Different hardness equipment will be evaluated for ease of use and accuracy. Additionally, testing will be performed to determine what is the optimal hardness to provide the best service life of the component. 1-1

EPRI Licensed Material Introduction

There are three major questions to be answered by the current investigation: Can hardness measurements be used to determine whether proper PWHT procedures were followed? Does field hardness equipment provide accurate, repeatable measurements that compare to laboratory equipment? Can PWHT temperatures be optimized to extend service lives?

The goal of this project was to answer these questions by welding three normalized and tempered P91 plates with a suitable filler material and subjecting the completed weldment to three different PWHT temperatures. The weldments were then sectioned and tested to reveal any trend in creep rupture properties that would be beneficial. Another goal of this project was to develop a method to determine whether PWHT operations were performed correctly. Laboratory hardness evaluations were conducted to accurately determine the hardnesses of the weld, heat-affected zone (HAZ), and base metal associated with each PWHT. A variety of field hardness test equipment was then used to measure the hardness to investigate how field tests would correlate with laboratory data. This comparison provides utilities with information to aid them in identifying hardnesses that may inhibit the service potential of post-constructed P91 components prior to placing them in service. The test matrix and weldment fabrication is discussed in Section 2, Test Program. The test results, discussions, and conclusions are documented in Section 3, Results, Section 4, Discussions, and Section 5, Conclusions.

1-2

EPRI Licensed Material

TEST PROGRAM

The program was divided into three main tasks. These included: What effect does PWHT have on residual hardness? What is the best way to measure hardness in the field? How does the hardness effect the service life of the weldment?

The evaluation was performed on 1.5-inch (3.8-cm) thick coupons heat-treated in an oven. Properties of base metal, weld metal, and HAZs were evaluated. Different hardness measurement equipment was then evaluated. Finally, the coupons were subjected to rupture testing to determine the hardness effect on service life.

Test Materials
Base Material The base metal used for the program was 1.5-inch (3.8-cm) thick ASTM A387 Gr 91 CL 2 purchased from Bethlehem Lukens Plate. The material was heat treated at the producing mill (Normalized 1900F [1038C] for 62 minutes AC and tempered 1450F [788C] for 109 minutes AC). Table 2-1 shows the chemistry for the base material. The heat number was C1472. The identification of the plates rolling direction was maintained for proper fabrication of the weld coupon to minimize any lamination affect on the mechanical properties. The mechanical properties are shown in Table 2-2. Note that only one heat of base metal and weld metal was used for this evaluation.
Table 2-1 Chemistry of Base Metal [2] Base Material ASME/ ASTM Plate Element (%) C 0.080.12 0.11 Mn 0.30 0.60 0.48 P 0.020 0.011 S 0.010 0.003 Cu NS 0.13 Si 0.20 0.50 0.27 Ni 0.40 0.28 Cr 8.00 9.50 8.36 Mo 0.85 1.05 0.98 V 0.18 0.25 0.217 Al NS 0.016 Cb 0.06 0.10 0.078 N 0.03 0.07 0.046

2-1

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program Table 2-2 Mechanical Properties of Base Metal [2] Tensile Strength (ksi [MPa]) 102.0 [703] 0.2% Yield Strength (ksi [MPa]) 78.4 [54] 22.0 % Elongation

Weld Metal All filler materials for this investigation were supplied courtesy of Bhler Thyssen Welding USA. The shielded metal arc welding (SMAW) filler used for the investigation was E9015-B9 H4.Two different electrode sizes were utilized for the completion of the weldment. The root pass was welded with a diameter of 0.125 inches (0.318 cm), while the remainder was filled out with a diameter of 0.156 inches (0.396 cm). The chemistries for both electrodes are given in Table 2-3.

2-2

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program Table 2-3 Weld Metal Chemistry [2] Diameter (in. [cm]) C 0.125 [0.318] 0.156 [0.396] 0.09 0.08 Si 0.24 0.22 Mn 0.73 0.62 P 0.007 0.008 S 0.008 0.007 Cr 8.55 9.14 Mo 1.05 1.11 Ni 0.37 0.39 Element (%) V 0.17 0.19 Al 0.004 0.004 N 0.022 0.033 Nb 0.054 0.050 Sn 0.004 0.003 As 0.006 0.007 Sb 0.001 0.001 Cu 0.03 0.01

2-3

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program

The mechanical properties of the weld metal are given in Table 2-4. The properties of the weld metal were determined by following the PWHT at 1400F (760C) for two hours.
Table 2-4 Mechanical Properties of Weld Metal [2] Electrode Diameter (in. [cm]) 0.125 [0.318] 0.156 [0.396] Tensile Strength (ksi [MPa]) 104.0 [717] 90.0 [621] 0.2% Yield Strength (ksi [MPa) 85.0 [586] 77.0 [531] 19.9 17.0 % Elongation

Mockup Fabrication
The mockup consisted of a standard P91 butt-welded plate using a conventional 37 bevel and 0.125-inch (0.318-cm) diameter electrode for the root and filled out with 0.156-inch (0.396-cm) diameter electrodes. The mockup was preheated to 450F (232C), and a 550F (288C) interpass temperature was maintained using the shielded metal arc welding (SMAW) process. The weld direction was 90 to the rolling direction of the base metal. The weld test plate configuration is shown in Figure 2-1.

1 Inch = 25.4 mm Figure 2-1 Weld Test Plate

Post Weld Heat Treatment

To investigate the affect PWHT has on the rupture properties of a welded component, a matrix of varying PWHTs was established. PWHTs were chosen on the basis of providing sufficient spread in the resulting weld metal hardness to associate any trends that may be revealed in the creep rupture testing with a particular PWHT temperature. Two temperatures, 1300F (704C) and 1400F (760C), were chosen to examine the upper and lower bounds of B31.1 and Section 2-4

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program

1. An additional temperature of 1200F (649C) was tested to investigate the consequences of a harder material resulting from a lower PWHT temperature. The PWHTs were carried out in a laboratory furnace with thermocouples attached to the surface of the weld test plate to ensure material temperature. The furnace was brought up to temperature to protect against overshoot at approximately 360F/hr (182C/hr). Once up to temperature, the plates were held for 2 hours and then allowed to air cool. The PWHT temperatures were all below the estimated AC1 temperatures for the base metal and weld metal used in the investigation. The estimated AC1 temperature for the base metal was 1495F (813C). The estimated weld metal AC1 was1480F (804C) and 1475F (802C) for the 0.156-inch (0.396-cm) and 0.125-inch (0.318-cm) diameter electrodes, respectively. These lower critical temperatures were estimated from Figure 2-2, which was developed from data obtained from Oak Ridge National Laboratory [1].

Figure 2-2 Effect of Ni + Mn on the AC1 Temperature [1]

2-5

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program

Hardness Testing
Hardness testing was performed to reveal the degree of tempering as a result of altering the PWHT temperature. Evaluations were conducted to thoroughly characterize the resulting weldment, HAZ, and base metal hardnesses of the different PWHTs. The hardness evaluations also compared the results of hardness testing performed with laboratory instruments with results obtained from various field-testing equipment. This in turn would provide utilities with information that would help them when performing quality assurance hardness checks of P91 installations to verify correct PWHT. Following the PWHT, cross sections were removed from each weld coupon that had been heat treated at one of the three PWHT temperatures (1200F, 1300F, and 1400F [649C, 704C, and 760C]). Figure 2-3 shows photograph showing the typical location of the cross-section removal for hardness testing from the weld plate. Note that the weld crown has been ground flat for hardness measurements.

Figure 2-3 Cross-Section Removal for Hardness Evaluation

Hardness evaluations were conducted on cross-sectioned samples, which had been ground on a surface grinder to approximately a 0.29-m surface finish and etched with 3% Nital to reveal the weld and HAZ. Similarly, hardness evaluations were conducted on the top surface (face) of the weld to simulate field-testing preparation with the objective of comparing results obtained through the thickness with results taken on the outer surface. The outer surface was ground with 80-grit sand paper and resulted in a 0.40-m surface roughness parallel to the grinding direction and 0.65-m surface roughness transverse to the grinding direction. Grinding was conducted to a depth that was sufficient to remove any visible decarburization from the surface that had resulted from the heat treatment. Hardness tests were performed in the weld metal, along the heataffected zone, and in the adjacent base metal. Figure 2-4 shows typical hardness test indentation 2-6

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program

sites conducted on the cross section of the weldment. Figure 2-5 shows hardness test indentations performed on the surface/face of the weldment.

Figure 2-4 Typical Hardness Indentation Sites on Cross Section

Figure 2-5 Typical Hardness Indentation Sites on Top Surface/Face

Laboratory instruments used to quantify the hardness were Vickers Micro-Hardness (Figure 2-6) and Rockwell Hardness (Figure 2-7) machines. Field instruments used were Equo Tip (Figure 2-8), Portable Rockwell (Figure 2-9), and TeleBrineller (Figure 2-10).

2-7

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program

Figure 2-6 Vickers Micro-Hardness Machine

Figure 2-7 Rockwell Hardness Machine

2-8

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program

Figure 2-8 Equo Tip

Figure 2-9 Portable Rockwell

2-9

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program

Figure 2-10 TeleBrineller

Micro-Hardness All micro-hardness testing was conducted using the Vickers (HV) indenter with 500-gram (17.6-oz) force on a polished surface. HV tests are conducted much like that of the Rockwell test with the exception that the HV tests utilize a square-based diamond pyramid indenter exclusively and typically incorporates much lower loads and smaller indentations, enabling the measurement of small areas (HAZ) or micro-constituents (carbides), thus the term micro-hardness. The other major difference lies in the way hardness values are derived. For micro-hardness tests, the measurement of the diagonal of the diamond indenters impression corresponds to the resulting hardness as opposed to the depth of penetration for the Rockwell C (HRC) and or B (HRB) scales. Once the HV data were gathered, all hardness values were converted to HRB. Rockwell Hardness For this examination, Rockwell hardness testing was conducted using either a 0.0625-inch (1.59-mm) diameter ball or conical diamond indenter with a 0.0079-inch (0.2-mm) apex radius. The operation of the Rockwell hardness-testing machine involves applying a minor load to the indenter to seat it into the test material and then applying a major load that in turn penetrates the metal test sample to a certain depth. The depth of penetration is directly related to the materials hardness, which is in turn read from a dial located on the front of the machine. The hardness tests performed in the laboratory were conducted using either the HRC or HRB scale, depending on the effect of the PWHT. Following the measurements, all values were converted to the B scale using data from ASTM E140 so that comparisons could be made.

2-10

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program

Equo Tip The hardness measurement carried out with the Equo Tip hardness tester is a dynamic method predicated upon the principle of energy measurement. During a hardness test, an impact body, equipped with a spherically shaped tungsten carbide tip, impacts under spring force against the test surface from which it rebounds. Impact and rebound velocities are measured and processed into the hardness value or L number [3]. The Equo Tip tests were performed using the D probe, which corresponds to certain physical characteristics associated with the impacting device. All measurements were taken with vertical-probe orientation. The test blocks from the weld test sample were supported on a granite measuring block to avoid any spring or vibration that would have interrupted the operation of the measuring device. Once the hardness values were obtained, conversion to HRB was made using the data supplied from the manufacturer of the Equo Tip. Portable Rockwell Hardness Tester The portable Rockwell Tester incorporated a spring-loaded spherical indenter, which impacts the material being tested with a known force. The force of impact and the diameter of the impacting ball results in an impression created on the surface of the test piece. The hardness of the material is then read directly from a microscope where diameter measurements are correlated to a resulting hardness based on the diameter of the test indentation. The microscope had hardness graduations from 20 to 60 HRC located on the eyepiece. All indentations were made on a granite measuring table to avoid mass effects. All measurements were converted to HRB. TeleBrineller TeleBrineller tests utilize the same principle as laboratory Brinell tests with the exception of load application and utilizing ratios of known hardness materials to arrive at hardness. The TeleBrinell instrument uses a standardized square bar of known hardness that is positioned inside an impacting device. During the test, load is applied via impacting the impact device with at least a 2-pound (0.91-kg) hammer. Upon impact, an impression is made in the standard reference material and the test material concurrently by a 0.0394-inch (10-mm) diameter steel ball. The resulting diameter is measured to within 0.05 mm using a microscope with distance graduations visible through the eyepiece of the microscope. Two measurements of the impression diameter are taken at 90 degrees in relation to one another and averaged from both the standard reference material and the test material. The ratio of the diameter of the indentation made on the test piece to the indentation made on the reference material is then multiplied by the hardness of the reference material to acquire the hardness of the test piece. The standard reference material utilized for the measurements of the various PWHTs was either the 165 BHN or 195 BHN test bar. Specific instructions in selecting the appropriate test bars to conduct the tests are included with the equipment. Once BHNs were collected, all values were converted to HRB.

2-11

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program

Creep Rupture Testing

A test matrix for rupture testing was assembled to identify any associated rupture trends with PWHT temperatures. Larson Miller Parameters (LMPs) were calculated and plotted versus stress. Table 2-5 shows the preliminary test matrix.
Table 2-5 Test Matrix PWHT Test temperatures to produce rupture hrs to produce rupture hrs to produce rupture hrs 1200F (649C) 1050F (566C) 500 1000 2000 1100F (593C) 500 1000 2000 1150F (621C) 500 1000 2000 1300F (704C) 1050F (566C) 500 1000 2000 1100F (593C) 500 1000 2000 1150F (621C) 500 1000 2000 1400F (760C) 1050F (566C) 500 1000 2000 1100F (593C) 500 1000 2000 1150F (621C) 500 1000 2000

Test temperatures were selected to stay below the lowest PWHT temperatures. Different test temperatures and stresses were chosen to cover a broader range on the LMP-versus-stress plot as well as investigate trends at different temperatures. Composite test samples were removed from the center thickness of the weld test plate for testing as shown in Figure 2-11. The HAZ was centered in the gage section. Post mortems of the ruptured samples will provide information as to the rupture location, such as base metal, HAZ, weld metal, and type 1, 2, 3, 4 failure.

2-12

EPRI Licensed Material Test Program

Figure 2-11 Test Specimen Removal

2-13

EPRI Licensed Material

RESULTS

Hardness
The results of the hardness testing for the 1200F, 1300F and 1400F (649C, 704C and 760C) PWHTs are shown in Tables 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3. The first number of each cell represents the average hardness from mid thickness of the weldment, which is where the cross weld rupture specimens were extracted. The second number is the hardness from tests taken on the surface or face of the weldment as would be obtained in the field. All hardness values were converted from their measured scale to Rockwell B scale for comparison.
Table 3-1 Hardness Results of 1200F (649C) PWHT Cross Section @ 50% Thickness/Surface* Instrument Base Metal Rockwell Portable Rockwell Equo Tip TeleBrineller Micro Hardness 96/95 98/98 93/92 96/95 98/98 100/97 100/ 98 90/99 100/97 106/99 HAZ Weld Metal 108/108 108/108 104/106 100/105 108/104

*All hardness values were converted from their measured scale to Rockwell B scale for comparison.

3-1

EPRI Licensed Material Results Table 3-2 Hardness Results of 1300F (704C) PWHT Cross Section @ 50% Thickness/Surface* Instrument Base Metal Rockwell Portable Rockwell Equo Tip TeleBrineller Micro Hardness 97/95 97/98 90/93 97/96 99/97 99/95 98/99 92/91 98/84 103/100 HAZ Weld Metal 103/103 103/105 101/102 104/104 107/104

*All hardness values were converted from their measured scale to Rockwell B scale for comparison. Table 3-3 Hardness Results of 1400F (760C) PWHT Cross Section @ 50% Thickness/Surface* Instrument Base Metal Rockwell Portable Rockwell Equo Tip TeleBrineller Micro Hardness 95/98 98/98 90/92 98/96 95/96 96/95 99/98 88/89 94/92 97/95 HAZ Weld Metal 97/100 98/98 94/96 96/96 100/99

*All hardness values were converted from their measured scale to Rockwell B scale for comparison.

3-2

EPRI Licensed Material Results Table 3-4 Summary of Hardness Ranges for Specific PWHTs PWHT Temperature 1200F (649C) 1300F (704C) 1400F (760C)
1

Base Metal 9599 9599 9599

HAZ 99106 100103 9597

1, 2

Weld Metal 105108 103107 96100

All hardness values were converted from their measured scale to Rockwell B scale for comparison. Equo Tip results were omitted due to the consistently low readings as compared to the other instruments. 2 HAZ values were obtained from micro-hardness testing. Other instruments were unsuitable for HAZ measurement due to size of indentation.

The results of the hardness data show that the majority of measurements taken on the cross section compare very well with measurements taken on the surface of the weldments. There was also very good correlation between laboratory and field testing equipment. The base metal hardnesses for the different PWHT temperatures were in the range of 95 to 99 RB which indicates that the additional 2 hours of tempering at 1400F, 1300F, and 1200F (760C, 704C, and 649C) did not alter the original base-metal normalized and tempered hardness. The affect of PWHT on the weld metal was the primary target for relating trends from the rupture testing. The 1400F (760C) PWHT produced weld metal hardness similar to the base metal ranging from approximately 95 to 100 RB. The hardnesses in the weld metal following the 1400F (760C) PWHT were consistent with the properties listed on the MTR of the weld metal. The measured tensile strength of the weld metal following 2 hours of PWHT at 1400F (760C) was 104 ksi (717 MPa). The approximate hardness of this strength level is 96.5 RB. The 1400F (760C) PWHT resulted in the HAZ hardness of approximately 95 to 97 RB. The 1300F (704C) PWHT produced a weld metal hardness range of 103 to 107 RB, higher than that of the 1400 F (760C). The HAZ hardness range was 100 to 103 RB. The 1200F (649C) PWHT had the highest resulting weld metal hardness range from approximately 105 to 108 RB. One reading of 100 BHN was recorded in the data but not consistent with the majority of the other data. Not much change was noticed between the 1200F and 1300F (649C and 704C) PWHT for the HAZ hardness properties. HAZ hardnesses of 99 to 106 RB were recorded for the 1200F (649C) PWHT. This slightly overlapping progressive increase of the weld metal hardness properties was ideal for evaluating any comparisons and ultimately stating any conclusions that may be drawn from the rupture data if in fact there are beneficial trends associated with the selection of PWHT temperatures. There was significant overlapping of the HAZ and weld metal hardnesses for the 1200F and 1300F (649C and 704C) PWHT. 3-3

EPRI Licensed Material Results

The Equo Tip consistently read lower than the other instruments, which may be due to material characteristics or the LD probe choice. The LG scale may be a more appropriate choice for this application because it uses a heavier impact body, therefore creating a larger indentation. Conversion deviations may also arise from the fact that there is no real clear physical relationship between a rebound type of instrument and a static type of hardness tester. Material characteristics that affect the reading are the presence of certain types of carbides in the matrix, which cause a local increase in the modulus, therefore resulting in L- values that are actually too low [3]. Interestingly, the TeleBrineller yielded closer-than-expected hardness values for the HAZ. Because the size of indentation that the TeleBrineller creates is usually larger than the width of a HAZ, the hardnesses were expected to be lower than that of measurements taken with the Vickers micro-hardness testing equipment. The ability to measure small areas (the fine-grained portion of the HAZ) makes micro-hardness measurement the instrument of choice when measuring HAZs. It is not recommended that a TeleBrineller be used in the field for characterization of HAZ hardness.

Rupture Data
As of the writing of this report, the rupture data available and/or currently running are given in Table 3-5. Test specimen loading conditions were developed based on the rupture data gathered from preliminary tests. Loading conditions will be developed as ruptures occur for each particular weld test plate/PWHT. Due to limited data, the trends developed thus far do not clearly define the rupture characteristics associated with each PWHT. Data will be added to the LMPversus-stress plot shown in Figure 3-1 with the expectation that the trends will become more distinguishable as new ruptures occur. At this point, there are insufficient data to declare any clear advantage of any of the PWHTs.
Table 3-5 Rupture Hours Data PWHT Temperature Test Condition 1200F (649C) 1300F (704C) Rupture Hours 1050F (566C) @ 28 ksi (193 MPa) 1100F (593C) @ 21 ksi (152 MPa) 1150F (621C) @ 15 ksi (103 MPa) 2363.7 1710.4 885.0 2436.6 1534.8 413.1 1583.8 2387.0 609.7 1400F (760C)

3-4

EPRI Licensed Material Results Table 3-5 (cont.) Rupture Hours Data PWHT Temperature Test Condition 1200F (649C) 1300F (704C) Rupture Hours 1050F (566C) @ 32 ksi (221 MPa) 1050F (566C) @ 30 ksi (207 MPa) 1100F (593C) @ 28 ksi (193 MPa) 1100F (593C) @ 22 ksi (145 MPa) 1150F (621C) @ 15 ksi (103 MPa) 1150F (621C) @ 12.5 ksi (86.2 MPa) TBD --TBD --TBD --TBD --TBD ----TBD --TBD --TBD TBD --1400F (760C)

1 ksi = 6.89 MPa Figure 3-1 Preliminary LMP-Versus-Stress Results for Various PWHT Temperatures

Failure Characterization
Conducting accelerated rupture testing to extrapolate long-term properties can sometimes mask what happens under actual operating conditions and long-term service. Thermal and mechanical 3-5

EPRI Licensed Material Results

stresses can affect the microstructure and rupture characteristics differently in varying test regimes. It is possible that their effect at high stress and low temperature or low stress and high temperature results in rupture properties altogether different from properties that occur at operating temperatures and pressures over long-term service. Four damage locations that are associated with weldments (for headers or piping) are described in Figure 3-2.

Type I Damage is longitudinal or transverse in the weld metal and remains entirely in the weld metal. Type II Damage is longitudinal or transverse in the weld metal but grows into the surrounding HAZ. Type III Damage is in the coarse-grained region. Type IV Damage is initiated or growing in the inter-critical zone of the HAZ (the transition region between fully transformed, fine-grained HAZ and the partially transformed parent base metal). Figure 3-2 Diagram of Damage Locations Associated With Weldments

EPRI with M & M Engineering and ERA Technology did some work investigating Type V failure of advanced ferritic materials (P91). In the assessment laboratory, cross weld stress rupture data were obtained for samples tested within specified conditions: 570 to 660C (299 to 349C), 60 to 210 MPa (8.7 to 30.5 ksi), and 86 to 7093 rupture hours. The tested samples were then sectioned and examined metallographically to determine whether or not Type V failure had occurred. As a result, a weld failure prediction diagram was generated showing a line of demarcation in which Type V failure would occur [4]. The majority of the tests for this project fell within the stated specified loading conditions studied in the Type V assessment. Considering the estimated and actual rupture times at the various test temperatures for this program, all of the tests conducted at 1150F (621C) should exhibit Type IV failures. The 1000-hour and 2000-hour tests at 1100F (593C) could possibly exhibit Type IV failures. None of the tests conducted at 1050F (565C) are expected to exhibit type IV failures. These estimations are based on the weld failure-predictor diagram shown in Figure 3-3 from the aforementioned P91 Type V assessment. The circles shown on the diagram are the anticipated ruptures for this projects loading conditions. Once testing is completed and the tested samples can be metallographically examined, the failure type will be determined and reported. As of the writing of this report, no failure locations have been determined.

3-6

EPRI Licensed Material Results

Figure 3-3 Predicted Failure Locations for P91 Material [4]

3-7

EPRI Licensed Material

DISCUSSIONS

Rupture Trends
As of the writing of this report, insufficient data have been collected to assemble conclusions as to the optimal PWHT for service life. Upon further data availability, the trends are expected to solidify.

Hardness
The hardness results revealed good correlation between measurements taken on cross sections and measurements taken on the surface. Laboratory instruments correlated well with the three investigated field instruments. Further investigation into the reason for the consistently lower readings obtained by the Equo Tip may be needed (micro-structural effects/different probe LG). The LD probe was utilized for this evaluation. Care must be taken in preparation of the surfaces for hardness testing to be conducted. Providing a smooth flat test area for indentations to be made provides increased accuracy of the results. Removing all decarburized material, which is present as a result of PWHT, prior to conducting tests is also crucial in making sure that all the material being tested is representative and consistent with the unaffected material in the component. Figures 4-1 and 4-2 illustrate how convolutions from coarse grinding can yield erroneous hardness readings with penetration-type hardness testers as well as diameter measured and rebound-type hardness testing equipment. The in Figure 4-1 represents the distance from the high and low points of a ground surface to the median height of the ground surface. The s for the coarse ground surface are larger than the finer-ground (smoother/flatter) surface. The large in Figure 4-2 allows unsupported areas underneath the indenter once contact is made at points A and B, which would allow deeper penetration of the indenter for Rockwell-type measurements.

4-1

EPRI Licensed Material Discussions

Figure 4-1 Effect of Coarse Grinding on Hardness Readings (Coarse Ground)

Figure 4-2 Effect of Coarse Grinding on Hardness Readings (Finer Ground)

For hardness equipment that requires diameter readings to be made, the same holds true: The indentation may be excessively out of round or the force required to move a convolution may be lower than the force required to displace solid base metal, resulting in a larger measured diameter. Rebound types of machines such as the Equo Tip will be affected by the higher and lower convolutions from coarse grinding by having a portion of its rebounding velocity diminished by the offset angle at A or B instead of vertical. All of the aforementioned instances result in a lower-than-actual hardness reading. Detailed procedures for surface preparation and measuring technique are typically included with each type of instrument. Testing during this project yielded satisfactory results from an 80-grit flat ground surface preparation. A thorough knowledge of weldment locations for the component being checked is essential for correct indentation placement. Prior to returning the component to service, a careful assessment and review of any hardness quality-assurance procedure taken in the evaluation of acceptable PWHT of P91 components are warranted to ensure accurate results. Identifying contributing factors that either inhibit or promote good results for each specific field hardness investigation will help to make certain that the results that are obtained are accurate. Written procedures 4-2

EPRI Licensed Material Discussions

should be available for the technician administering the hardness tests. These data coupled with other sound mechanical and metallurgical information should provide confidence that the repaired or replaced component will perform as designed. As in any case, just checking the hardness on the surface of a component should not be an all clear for return to service but rather a strong indicator of what areas to focus on in the assessment of fitness for service. In general, when welding using the same procedure with similar welding electrodes and base metal as was utilized for this project, the expected hardness of the weld metal as measured by field instruments should be in the range of 95 RB to 30 RC, following a PWHT in the range of 1300F to 1400F (704C to 760C). The results also show a good probability that PWHT performed on a component in the range of approximately 1250 to 1300F (677C to 704C) could possibly achieve hardness similar to that obtained when PWHT is performed at 1300F (704C). Nevertheless, the results of this investigation show that if the weld metal hardness is greater than 33 RC/107 RB, one should take a closer look at the fabrication materials and procedures (welding and PWHT) utilized for repair or construction. Additional testing to determine the HAZ hardness should be conducted to determine if the weld metal hardness is unusually high or if the weld metal and HAZ hardnesses are both high. High hardness in both the weld metal and HAZ could be a result of tempering at too low of a temperature, thereby not providing sufficient thermal energy for the necessary micro-structural transformations to occur in the weld metal and HAZ. High hardness in the weld metal could be a result of exceeding the lower critical temperature of the weld metal during tempering, which would allow a partial re-austenitizing of the weld metal to occur and subsequent formation of untempered martensite upon cooling. Microstructural examination would be necessary as well to identify and support these scenarios.

4-3

EPRI Licensed Material

CONCLUSIONS

Hardness Versus Rupture Life of P91 Materials

The following conclusions are given concerning the hardnesses of the P91 weldments as a result of the various PWHTs: PWHT at 1200, 1300, 1400F (649, 704, 760C) did not alter the original base metal normalized and tempered hardness of 95 to 99 RB. Measurable differences in HAZ hardness resulted from the different heat treatment temperatures, with the 1400F (760C) PWHT having the most effect: HAZ hardness at 1400F (760C) PWHT was 95 to 97 RB as measured by microhardness. HAZ hardness at 1300F (704C) PWHT was 100 to 103 RB as measured by microhardness. HAZ hardness at 1200F (649C) PWHT was 99 to 106 RB as measured by microhardness. Measurable differences in the hardness of weld metal resulted from the different heat treatment temperatures, with the 1400F (760C) PWHT having the most effect: Weld metal hardness at 1400F (760C) PWHT was 96 to 100 RB as measured with the Rockwell instrument. Weld metal hardness at 1300F (704C) PWHT was 103 to 107 RB as measured with the Rockwell instrument. Weld metal hardness at 1200F (649C) PWHT was 105 to 108 RB as measured with the Rockwell instrument. At the writing of this progress report, limited creep-rupture data are available from which to draw any conclusions about optimal PWHT for service life based on hardness. More data will be provided in the final report.

Hardness Measurement Techniques

The following conclusions are given concerning the hardness data obtained by measurement with the various pieces of equipment: The Equo Tip consistently read lower than the other instruments used in this study, possibly due to the type indentor used (LD). 5-1

EPRI Licensed Material Conclusions

The TeleBrineller correlated well with laboratory instruments. It should only be used to determine macro-hardness. It is not suitable for determining HAZ hardness properties. The Portable Rockwell correlated well with laboratory instruments. The scale for this study covered 20 to 60 RC. The instruments used in the field to determine hardness correlated well with the laboratory instruments, with the exception of the Equo Tip. Good correlation was achieved between hardness values recorded at the midwall on the cross section versus hardness values obtained on the surface of the weld for the surface preparation attained for this study.

5-2

EPRI Licensed Material

REFERENCES
1. Guideline for Welding P(T)91 Materials, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2001. 1006590. 2. Performance Review of P/T91 Steels, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2002. 1004516. 3. PROCEQ Equo Tip Operations Manual, 4th Edition, Zurich, Switzerland, 1977. 4. Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Advances in Material Technology for Fossil Power Plants, EPRI, Palo Alto, CA: 2001. 1001462.

6-1

Target: Fossil Materials and Repair

SINGLE USER LICENSE AGREEMENT THIS IS A LEGALLY BINDING AGREEMENT BETWEEN YOU AND THE ELECTRIC POWER RESEARCH INSTITUTE, INC. (EPRI). PLEASE READ IT CAREFULLY BEFORE REMOVING THE WRAPPING MATERIAL. BY OPENING THIS SEALED PACKAGE YOU ARE AGREEING TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT,PROMPTLY RETURN THE UNOPENED PACKAGE TO EPRI AND THE PURCHASE PRICE WILL BE REFUNDED. 1. GRANT OF LICENSE EPRI grants you the nonexclusive and nontransferable right during the term of this agreement to use this package only for your own benefit and the benefit of your organization.This means that the following may use this package: (I) your company (at any site owned or operated by your company); (II) its subsidiaries or other related entities; and (III) a consultant to your company or related entities, if the consultant has entered into a contract agreeing not to disclose the package outside of its organization or to use the package for its own benefit or the benefit of any party other than your company. This shrink-wrap license agreement is subordinate to the terms of the Master Utility License Agreement between most U.S. EPRI member utilities and EPRI.Any EPRI member utility that does not have a Master Utility License Agreement may get one on request.

About EPRI EPRI creates science and technology solutions for the global energy and energy services industry. U.S. electric utilities established the Electric Power Research Institute in 1973 as a nonprofit research consortium for the benefit of utility members, their customers, and society. Now known simply as EPRI, the company provides a wide range of innovative products and services to more than 1000 energyrelated organizations in 40 countries. EPRIs multidisciplinary team of scientists and engineers draws on a worldwide network of technical and business expertise to help solve todays toughest energy and environmental problems. EPRI. Electrify the World

2. COPYRIGHT This package, including the information contained in it, is either licensed to EPRI or owned by EPRI and is protected by United States and international copyright laws. You may not, without the prior written permission of EPRI, reproduce, translate or modify this package, in any form, in whole or in part, or prepare any derivative work based on this package. 3. RESTRICTIONS You may not rent, lease, license, disclose or give this package to any person or organization, or use the information contained in this package, for the benefit of any third party or for any purpose other than as specified above unless such use is with the prior written permission of EPRI.You agree to take all reasonable steps to prevent unauthorized disclosure or use of this package.Except as specified above, this agreement does not grant you any right to patents, copyrights, trade secrets, trade names, trademarks or any other intellectual property, rights or licenses in respect of this package. 4.TERM AND TERMINATION This license and this agreement are effective until terminated.You may terminate them at any time by destroying this package. EPRI has the right to terminate the license and this agreement immediately if you fail to comply with any term or condition of this agreement. Upon any termination you may destroy this package, but all obligations of nondisclosure will remain in effect. 5. DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITIES NEITHER EPRI,ANY MEMBER OF EPRI,ANY COSPONSOR, NOR ANY PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM: (A) MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, (I) WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION,APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS PACKAGE, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, OR (II) THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS, INCLUDING ANY PARTYS INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR (III) THAT THIS PACKAGE IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USERS CIRCUMSTANCE; OR (B) ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRI OR ANY EPRI REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS PACKAGE OR ANY INFORMATION,APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS PACKAGE. 6. EXPORT The laws and regulations of the United States restrict the export and re-export of any portion of this package, and you agree not to export or re-export this package or any related technical data in any form without the appropriate United States and foreign government approvals. 7. CHOICE OF LAW This agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of California as applied to transactions taking place entirely in California between California residents. 8. INTEGRATION You have read and understand this agreement, and acknowledge that it is the final, complete and exclusive agreement between you and EPRI concerning its subject matter, superseding any prior related understanding or agreement. No waiver, variation or different terms of this agreement will be enforceable against EPRI unless EPRI gives its prior written consent, signed by an officer of EPRI.

2003 Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), Inc. All rights reserved. Electric Power Research Institute and EPRI are registered service marks of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. EPRI. ELECTRIFY THE WORLD is a service mark of the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc. Printed on recycled paper in the United States of America 1004702

EPRI 3412 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94304 PO Box 10412, Palo Alto, California 94303 USA 800.313.3774 650.855.2121 askepri@epri.com www.epri.com