Forging Material SA-105 Vs SA-350 LF2

4 posts by 3 authors

Agrawal Sunil (Mumbai -Stequ)

Dear Friends,

May I request you to guide me about the basic difference between two forging Material SA-
105 Vs SA-350 LF2. Is it possible to use SA-105 below -29° C?

Best Regards,
Sunil Agrawal
EDTICB-Mumbai (STEQU)
Ph.: +91 22 6777 7237

Kannan....@linde-le.com

The subject is the ability to withstand the sustained stresses by the ductility and the grade of
brittleness of the material from
ambient to lower temp. evaluated by the charpy test. There is no crystal change happening at lower
temp. till -50.

The below points may clarify your question.

1) The composition difference is in the Carbon and Manganese composition inverse variation.
2) This effect makes the A350 better off than the A105 at lower temp. though the phys. property is
same at lower temp.
3) The default heat treatment difference also helps A350 at lower temp. A350 requires min. Norm. or
N&T or Q&T.
4) Not the least the class of LF2 is generally not specified. But it is makes an important diff. in the
impact test requirement.
4) The ASME recommends the min. temp. as -50 for A350 LF2. A105 till -20.

Finally if the CE is same and Heat treatment is same and the Hardness being nearly equal and if it
passes the charpy test
definitely A105 can be used below -20. However the welding may make the difference in why not
using the A105 below -20 as
Manganese & Silicon makes an important difference in to use / not to use A105 at temp. lower than -
20. But the latest manufacturing
processes can ensure the A105 manganese content at min.1.0%.
With regards,
Kannan.

"Agrawal Sunil \(Mumbai -Stequ\)"

<S.Ag...@ticb.com> To <material...@googlegroups.com>
Sent by: material...@googlegroups.com cc "Wagh Nilesh \(Mumbai - Stequ\)" <N.W...@ticb.com>
27/08/2007 11:11 Subject [MW:118] Forging Material SA-105 Vs SA-350 LF2
Please respond to
material...@googlegroups.com
- show quoted text -

Raghuram Bathula

Q: basic difference between two forging Material SA-105 Vs SA-350 LF2?

The basic difference is its manufacturing (Melting) Process –
SA350: The steel shall be produced by any of the following primary processes: open-hearth, basic oxygen,
electric-furnace, or vacuum-induction melting (VIM). The primary melting may incorporate separate degassing
or refining, and may be followed by secondary melting using electroslag remelting (ESR), or vacuum-arc
remelting (VAR).
The steel shall be fully killed, fine-grain practice. The molten steel may be vacuum treated prior to or during
pouring of the ingot.
Where as SA105: there is no such requirement.

Also Heat treatment is another basic diff between these two N&T or Q&T will give an edge over
SA105.

Q: Is it possible to use SA-105 below -29° C?

Yes provided the toughness results @ given design temp (MDMT) are meeting the construction code
requirements

From: material...@googlegroups.com [mailto:material...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Agrawal

Sunil (Mumbai -Stequ)
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 2:41 PM
To: material...@googlegroups.com
Cc: Wagh Nilesh (Mumbai - Stequ)

Subject: [MW:118] Forging Material SA-105 Vs SA-350 LF2

Dear Friends,

May I request you to guide me about the basic difference between two forging Material SA-105 Vs
SA-350 LF2. Is it possible to use SA-105 below -29° C?

Best Regards,
Sunil Agrawal
EDTICB-Mumbai (STEQU)
Ph.: +91 22 6777 7237
 Raghuram Bathula

“Susceptibility to brittle fracture of flanges in steel ASTM A105"

The attachment gives you the recommendations for pipe flanges made in
forged steel complying with ASTM A 105, this research project was conducted
by Belgian welding institute on a series of flanges.
The ASME code section VIII, division 1/ ASME B31.3 (with in the pressure temperature ratings of
B16.5) permits the use of the steel grade ASTM A 105 up to a temperature of -29°C, without any
provisions relating to the resistance to brittle fracture.

During an incident in 1999 in an HDPE (High Density Polyethylene) reactor a brittle fracture occurred
at a temperature of -12°C in a 24’’ flange consisting of this grade of steel. .

The company where the incident took place ordered an investigation and different identical flanges
made according to ASTM A 105 were subjected to a scrutiny of their
Material properties. This investigation showed that about 50% of the flanges had an analogue
structure (microstructure and grain size) as the fractured flange and hence
Were equally liable to brittle fracture. In view of de ample use of this grade of steel in the (petro)
chemical industry and the prevention of major accidents, the Administration of Labor Safety has
initiated a research project in September 2000 to look deeper into the sensitivity to brittle fracture of
ASTM A 105 grade steel. It resulted in June 2002 in a series of recommendations for new flanges as
well as flanges already in service. This document includes all of these recommendations.

Enjoy reading the report and recommendations/conclusion at the end

Good luck

From: material...@googlegroups.com [mailto:material...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf

Of Kannan.Sundaram@Linde-LE.com
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2007 7:11 PM
To: material...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [MW:124] 120] Fw: [MW:118] Forging Material SA-105 Vs SA-350 LF2

I have attached a metallographic original picture of a sample tested recently of one major European
supplier for reference. However it is of a pipe material and not of forging. But it could be of good
comparision. The extreme fine grain is clearly visible which was obtained by Q&T process of hot mill
product and was statistically considered to be one of the best supplier for LT pipe & thier HT process.
The charpy value was 145 against >=12J.

Also the yield strength changes considerably in coarse-grained than fine-grained steel during aging
process. Also brittleness increases after the aging in coarse-grained steel. So the heat treatment is
the key complimented by the managanese & silicon %. On the effect of manganese I will write in
detail tomorrow.