EXTENDED REPORT

BANGALADESH UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING

& TECHNOLOGY (BUET)

Department of MME
Course Title: Metal Joining Technology Sessional

Course No: MME 348

STUDENT IDS
1511050
1511036
1511028
INVESTIGATION OF WELD JOINT 1511035
1511037
Macro & Micro investigation of welded joint
Mechanical Testing of welded joint Submitted to
Course Teacher: Dr. Mamun Al Rashed
 Plagiarism Statement
Before handing in assessed coursework, please fill up a copy of this plagiarism
statement. You should sign and date it, and put it in your report’s soft copy

PLAGIARISM STATEMENT (to be signed by student)

Plagiarism (unacknowledged borrowing and quotation) is an examination offence and carries

heavy penalties.

I declare that, apart from properly referenced quotations, this report is my own work and contains no
plagiarism; it has not been submitted previously for any other assessed unit on this or other degree
courses.

Student name: MD. Rajbanul Akhond

Student IDS: 1511050, 36, 28, 35, 37

Course title and number: Metal Joining Technology Sessional (MME 348)

Student Signature: MD. Rajbanul Akhond

Date: 13.02.19

1
ABSTRACT

Welding is the process of jointing metals permanently which holds our world together. That’s why
it is necessary to determine the performance of weld joint. If done correctly a weld can withstand
more load than the base metal itself. On the other hand, if it is not done correctly and tested
properly, it can cause catastrophic failure causing damage of infrastructure and human life. So, it is
necessary to test welded joint properly to test if there is any fault and if it fulfills the desired strength
requirement.

In our tests we have tried to do just that. We did macroscopic and microscopic test of the welded
joints to determine if there are any faults such as porosity, inclusions, brittle phase etc. Then we did
hardness test to determine if the weld can withstand wear and tear of service conditions. We also
did tensile test, guided bend test and nick brake test to determine the mechanical properties of the
welded joint. Composition was also determined using OES to compare our sample’s properties with
standard using UNS numbers. Standards were followed to draw the 3D and 2D picture of the sample
and also to compare them. But the samples were not prepared according to standards accurately.
Thus, we can see some discrepancies while comparing with the standards. Preparing the test
coupons and testing it according to standards and more test points can improve the test results and
hence safety of the welded joint.

2
Table of Content

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 7

Chapter 2 EQIPMENT LIST ................................................................................................................... 8
Hardness Test .................................................................................................................................. 8
Macro & Microstructure ................................................................................................................. 8
Tensile Test ..................................................................................................................................... 8
Guided Bend Test ............................................................................................................................ 9
Nick Break Test ................................................................................................................................ 9
Composition Test ............................................................................................................................ 9
Chapter 3 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE ............................................................................................ 10
Drawing of Coupons according to standard.................................................................................. 10
Tensile Sample .......................................................................................................................... 10
Guided Bend test Sample .......................................................................................................... 12
Nick Break Sample..................................................................................................................... 14
Hardness Test ................................................................................................................................ 16
Macro & Microstructure Test ....................................................................................................... 16
Tensile Test ................................................................................................................................... 17
Guided Bend Test .......................................................................................................................... 18
Nick Break Test .............................................................................................................................. 19
Chapter 4 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................ 20
Hardness Testing ........................................................................................................................... 20
Composition of the specimen ................................................................................................... 20
HARDNESS TEST REPORT........................................................................................................... 21
Tensile Testing............................................................................................................................... 22
Composition of the specimen ................................................................................................... 22
Tensile Test (QW 150, ASME Section IX) ................................................................................... 22
Guided Bend Testing ..................................................................................................................... 23
Composition of the specimen ................................................................................................... 23
Guide Bend Test (QW 160, ASME Section IX) ........................................................................... 24
Nick Break Testing ......................................................................................................................... 24
Composition of the specimen ................................................................................................... 24

3
 Nick Break Test Result (API STANDARD 1104) .......................................................................... 24
Chapter 5 DISCUSSION ...................................................................................................................... 25
Hardness Testing ........................................................................................................................... 25
Effect of Composition................................................................................................................ 25
Effect of Structure ..................................................................................................................... 26
Comparison of Hardness ........................................................................................................... 28
Tensile Testing............................................................................................................................... 29
Mode of Failure ......................................................................................................................... 29
Comparison with standard (UNS) ............................................................................................. 29
Comparison with standard requirements ................................................................................. 30
Guided Bend Test .......................................................................................................................... 31
Mode of Failure ......................................................................................................................... 31
Comparison with standard (UNS) ............................................................................................. 31
Comparison with standard requirements ................................................................................. 32
Nick Break Test .............................................................................................................................. 32
Mode of Failure ......................................................................................................................... 32
Comparison with standard (UNS) ............................................................................................. 33
Comparison with standard requirements ................................................................................. 33
Chapter 6 CONCLUSION .................................................................................................................... 34
Reference ...................................................................................................................................... 35
Appendix A .................................................................................................................................... 36
Appendix B .................................................................................................................................... 37

4
Table of Figures
Figure 1: QW-150 TENSION TEST; ASME Section IX, 2007; Page: 04 ................................................ 10
Figure 2: 3D Model of Tensile sample ............................................................................................... 11
Figure 3: 2D details drawing according to standard ......................................................................... 11
Figure 4: QW-160 GUIDED-BEND TESTS; ASME Section IX, 2007; Page: 05 ..................................... 12
Figure 5: 3D Model of guided bend test sample (Both Face & Root Bend) ...................................... 13
Figure 6: 2D details drawing of Bend test sample according to standard ........................................ 13
Figure 7: 3D Model of Nick Break test sample .................................................................................. 14
Figure 8: API STANDARD 1104; Figure: 05; Page: 20 ........................................................................ 14
Figure 9: 2D details of Nick Break test sample according to standard ............................................. 15
Figure 10: Standard Tensile sample .................................................................................................. 17
Figure 11: Typical Bend test jigs; ....................................................................................................... 18
Figure 12: Nick Break test sample after preparation ........................................................................ 19
Figure 13: Composition test points in Hardness test sample ........................................................... 25
Figure 14: Effect of Mn in weld metal ............................................................................................... 25
Figure 15: Macroscopic view of the welded joint showing different zones ..................................... 26
Figure 16: Microstructure at deposited zone ................................................................................... 26
Figure 17: Microstructure of the Heat affected zone (HAZ); (a)Coarsen Zone (b)Refine Zone
(c)Transition Zone ............................................................................................................................. 27
Figure 18: Microstructure of Base metal .......................................................................................... 27
Figure 19: Hardness levels at different zones showed as color map ................................................ 28
Figure 20: (a) Tensile test sample after testing (b) Fracture view (c) Fracture surface .................... 29
Figure 21: Guided bend sample after bending showing both face and root portions ..................... 31
Figure 22: Nick Break test sample showing weld fracture surface and defects ............................... 32

5
List of Tables
Table 1: OES results of Hardness test sample for both Weld and Base metal ................................. 20
Table 2: OES results of Tensile test sample ...................................................................................... 22
Table 3: OES results of Guided Bend test samples for both Face & Root bend................................ 23
Table 4: OES results of Nick Break sample ........................................................................................ 24
Table 5: Percentage of important alloying elements ........................................................................ 25
Table 6: Comparison of Hardness between theoretical and Measured hardness............................ 28
Table 7: Comparison with standard values using UNS number ........................................................ 30
Table 8: Comparison of the tested sample according to QW-153 .................................................... 30
Table 9: Comparison of bend test according to QW-163.................................................................. 32
Table 10: Comparison of Nick break test according to API 1104 (5.6.3.3) ....................................... 33

6
 Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

Until the end of the 19th century, the only welding process was forged welding, which blacksmiths
had used for millennia to join iron and steel by heating and hammering. Arc welding and oxy-fuel
welding were among the first processes to develop late in the century, and electric resistance
welding followed soon after. Welding technology advanced quickly during the early 20th century as
the world wars drove the demand for reliable and inexpensive joining methods. Following the wars,
several modern welding techniques were developed, including manual methods like shielded metal
arc welding, now one of the most popular welding methods, as well as semi-automatic and
automatic processes such as gas metal arc welding, submerged arc welding, flux-cored arc welding
and electroslag welding. Developments continued with the invention of laser beam welding,
electron beam welding, magnetic pulse welding, and friction stir welding in the latter half of the
century. Today, the science continues to advance.

Many distinct factors influence the strength of welds and the material around them, including the
welding method, the amount and concentration of energy input, the weldability of the base
material, filler material, and flux material, the design of the joint, and the interactions between all
these factors. To test the quality of a weld, either destructive or nondestructive testing methods are
commonly used to verify that welds are free of defects, have acceptable levels of residual stresses
and distortion, and have acceptable heat-affected zone (HAZ) properties. Types of welding defects
include cracks, distortion, gas inclusions (porosity), non-metallic inclusions, lack of fusion,
incomplete penetration, lamellar tearing, and undercutting. The metalworking industry has
instituted specifications and codes to guide welders, weld inspectors, engineers, managers, and
property owners in proper welding technique, design of welds, how to judge the quality of Welding
Procedure Specification, how to judge the skill of the person performing the weld, and how to
ensure the quality of a welding job. In this experiment, Micro and Macro examination and
mechanical properties of welded joints is investigated. In chapter 2 necessary equipment are listed,
3D model and 2D drawing of the specimens according to standard and experimental procedure are
discussed in chapter 3. In chapter 4 & 5 the test results are given and discussed. Work flow of tests
and welding qualification forms according to standard are given in the appendix.

7
 Chapter 2 EQIPMENT LIST

Hardness Test

1. Emery papers of various grades. They are 120, 320, 600, 800,1200 and 1500.

2. Vickers Hardness testing machine

3. Microscope with measuring bar

Macro & Microstructure

1. Emery papers of various grades. They are 120, 320, 600, 800,1200 and 1500.

2. Polishing wheel with Alumina (Al2O3) powder

3. Acetone

4. Etching reagent Natal

5. Metallurgical microscope

6. Image processing software

Tensile Test

1. Test coupon

2. Cutter and grinder

3. Universal tensile testing machine

4. Slide caliper for measuring

8
Guided Bend Test

1. Test coupon

2. Grinder

3. Universal tensile testing machine with guide

Nick Break Test

1. Test coupon

2. 3Cutter and grinder

3. Universal tensile testing machine

Composition Test

1. Cutter

2. Grinder and emery papers

3. Optical Emission Spectrometer

9
 Chapter 3 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

Drawing of Coupons according to standard

Tensile Sample[1]

Figure 1: QW-150 TENSION TEST; ASME Section IX, 2007; Page: 04

10
 Figure 2: 3D Model of Tensile sample

Figure 3: 2D details drawing according to standard

11
Guided Bend test Sample[1]

Figure 4: QW-160 GUIDED-BEND TESTS; ASME Section

IX, 2007; Page: 05

12
Figure 5: 3D Model of guided bend test sample (Both Face & Root Bend)

Figure 6: 2D details drawing of Bend test sample according to standard

13
Nick Break Sample[2]

Figure 8: API STANDARD 1104; Figure: 05; Page: 20

Figure 7: 3D Model of Nick Break test sample

14
Figure 9: 2D details of Nick Break test sample according to standard

15
Hardness Test

1. The sample was placed on the vice.

2. The indenter was lowered until it just touches the specimen surface.

3. The appropriate load (F = 5kgf) was set for the indenter for 10 seconds.

4. The indenter was allowed to penetrate the specimen surface.

5. Load was removed and indenter was raised from specimen surface.

6. The appropriate parameter (diameter) of the indentation was measured.

7. The hardness value was read from the machine directly.

8. The above steps were repeated for 9 times at the marked locations of sample.[3]

9. Using these readings, a hardness profile along the welded sample was achieved.

Macro & Microstructure Test

1. The surface of the sample was grinded using emery papers of grades 120,320,600,800,1200 and
1500 gradually.

2. After finishing grinding, the surface of the sample was polished using a polishing cloth with
alumina powder as abrasive on it.

3. Then a shiny mirror surface formed.

4. The mirror-like surface was then etched using 2% Natal.

6. The Deposited Zone and Heat Affected Zone were identified.

7. Microstructures were observed using an optical microscope.

8. The micrographs were taken using a software.

16
Tensile Test

1. Provided specimens were steel plates (dog bone). Specimen dimensions (width, thickness and
gauge length) were measured with the calipers and recorded in a table provided. The location of
the gauge length was marked along the parallel length of each specimen for subsequent observation
of necking and strain measurement.

Figure 10: Standard Tensile sample

2. Universal Testing Machine was used in this test which can give a maximum load of 50KN.

3. The specimen was fitted on to the universal Testing Machine (UTM) and the tensile test was
carried on. The data was gathered using the software, and loaded into a spreadsheet. At a set value
of strain (past the yield strain), the software stopped using data from the extensometers, and
started gathering the strain information using the position of the moving crosshead.

4. The Blue Hill data acquisition software was used for data collection. Which is an automated
software from where we can get our desired data of tensile testing.

5. Collected data was calibrated using the calibration chart. After that Young's modulus, yield
strength, ultimate tensile strength, fracture strain, % elongation and % area of reduction of each
specimen was calculated and record on the provided table after the test.

17
Guided Bend Test

1. Measured the width and thickness of the specimen. Marked on the locations (root or face)
where the load will be applied under three-point bending.

2. Placed the sample carefully on to the stage of 3 point bending fixture of a universal testing
machine. Make sure that the loading point was placed on to the marked location.

Figure 11: Typical Bend test jigs;

Source: www.twi-global.com/technical-knowledge/job-knowledge/bend-testing-073

3. Carried out the bend test until failure takes place.

4. Constructed the load extension or load deflection curve to calculate the flexural bend strength
and elastic modulus of the specimen

5. Completed the Data Sheet.

18
Nick Break Test

1. To accomplish the nick-break test for checking a butt weld, a piece of specimen was prepared for
test.

2. The test specimen shall be cut transversely to the welded joint and shall have the full thickness
of the plate at the joint. This was shown by the figure 1 below.

Figure 12: Nick Break test sample after preparation

3. Make a saw cut at each edge and at the surface through the center of the weld. The depth of cut
slot should be refer to the lowest weld bead as long as all the welded joint have been sawed.

4. The specimen was fitted on to the universal Testing Machine (UTM) and the nick break test was
carried on. The data was gathered using the software, and loaded into a spreadsheet.

5. Applied the force using UTM machine onto test specimen.

6. The forced should be applied until the test specimen break or fracture.

19
 Chapter 4 RESULTS

Hardness Testing

Composition of the specimen

Table 1: OES results of Hardness test sample for both Weld and Base metal

Elements Weld metal Base metal

Fe 98.598 97.619
C 0.16897 0.12496
Si 0.10579 0.21034
Mn 0.71953 1.7498
P 0.01362 0.01194
S 0.00496 0.00311
Cu 0.02387 0.01438
Ni 0.03843 0.04324
Cr 0.05272 0.15915
Al 0.0083 0.03986
V 0 0
Mo 0.25556 0
N 0 0.01024
B 0.00085 0.0087
Nb 0 0
Ti 0.00933 0.01316

20
HARDNESS TEST REPORT

Type of Test Hardness Test

Sample Identification WPS 01

Type of Hardness Test Vickers 5 kg
Parent Metal Low Alloy Steel (UNS: G13300)
Thickness of Material 15 mm
Type of Weld Butt Welded Pipe
Welding Process Plasma ARC
Consumables Low Alloy Steel (UNS: G10180)
Heat Treatment and/or Ageing -
Comments -
Witnesses by MD. Rajbanul Akhond

Position Parent Metal HAZ Weld Metal HAZ Parent Metal

Within 2 mm mm -14 -10 0 10 14
from Top
HV 181.4 167.7 201.1 167.7 181.4
Surface
Root Area mm -14 -5 0 5 14
HV 183.05 169.9 197.8 169.9 183.05
Within 2 mm mm -15 -3.6 0 3.6 15
from Bottom
Surface HV 184.7 178.7 210.2 178.7 184.7

21
Tensile Testing

Composition of the specimen

Table 2: OES results of Tensile test sample

Elements Fe Mn C Si N Cr P Ta
Percentage 99.17 0.304 0.175 0.135 0.0441 0.0185 0.018 0.0176

S Sb Ni Cu W Bi As Zn Pb
0.0173 0.0154 0.0125 0.0099 0.0097 0.0086 0.0066 0.0056 0.005

Co Zr Mo Al V Nb Ca Mg Se
0.0049 0.0041 0.0036 0.0023 0.0022 0.002 0.0018 0.0015 0.0013

Sn B Ti
0.0009 0.0006 0.0005

Tensile Test (QW 150, ASME Section IX)

Average
Ultimate Ultimate Type and
Sample Ultimate
Width* Thickness Area Tensile Tensile Location
Identification Tensile
Load strength Fracture
Strength

GRP No-002
25.6 6.15 157.44 54.3 345
W/ID-ATT-001

Ductile;
333.5 Base
Metal

GRP No-001
26 9 234 75.5 322
W/ID-ATT-002

*Due to smaller diameter of the pipe, actual width of 19mm was not maintained for a few samples

22
Guided Bend Testing

Composition of the specimen

Table 3: OES results of Guided Bend test samples for both Face & Root bend

Elements Face Bend Root Bend

Fe 99.16 98.92
Si 0.311 0.703
Mn 0.176 0.13
C 0.134 0.0156
Se 0.0362 0.0371
Ti 0.0218 0.025
P 0.0204 0.0157
N 0.0185 0.0136
Cr 0.0178 0.0062
B 0.0132 0.0138
S 0.013 0.0189
Pb 0.0109 0.0096
Nb 0.0103 0.0041
Cu 0.0099 0.001
Ca 0.008 0.0067
Mg 0.0062 0.0021
Co 0.005 0.005
Ni 0.0046 0.0038
V 0.0036 0.0042
Ta 0.0034 0.003
Sb 0.0033 0.0522
Bi 0.0029 0.0031
W 0.0025 0.0026
Zn 0.0022 0.0017
Al 0.0017 0.0011
Sn 0.001 0.0019
As 0.0005 0.0017
Zr 0.0005 0.0005
Mo 0.0005 0.0005

23
Guide Bend Test (QW 160, ASME Section IX)
Sample
Width* Type Observation
Identification
Transverse
25.35 No crack can be seen on the bend face surface
Face
GRP No-002
W/ID-ABT-001 Transverse
25.95 No crack can be seen on the bend root surface
Root

Transverse
26 No crack can be seen on the bend face surface
GRP No-002 Face
W/ID-ABT-002 Transverse
25 No crack can be seen on the bend root surface
Root
* Due to smaller diameter of the pipe, actual width of 19mm was not maintained for a few
samples

Nick Break Testing

Composition of the specimen

Table 4: OES results of Nick Break sample

Elements Fe C Mn Si Sn Cu Mo Pb
Percentage 97.98 1.54 0.191 0.0659 0.0449 0.0306 0.0279 0.0236

P B Zr Co Ca Cr W Se Al
0.0229 0.0216 0.0177 0.0137 0.0135 0.0131 0.011 0.0097 0.0089

Ti Ta Zn V S N Bi Ni Mg
0.0084 0.008 0.0079 0.0072 0.0066 0.0064 0.0052 0.005 0.0035

Sb As Nb
0.0025 0.0023 0.0018

Nick Break Test Result (API STANDARD 1104)

Intentionally the weld joint was broken.

➢ Weld fracture surface is porous

➢ Brittle fracture

24
 Chapter 5 DISCUSSION

Hardness Testing

Effect of Composition

Filler Metal
Base Metal

Figure 13: Composition test points in Hardness test sample

Table 5: Percentage of important alloying elements

Position Fe C Si Mn P S Ni Cr
Base Metal 97.619 0.12496 0.21034 1.7498 0.01194 0.00311 0.04324 0.15915
Filler Metal 98.598 0.16897 0.10579 0.71953 0.01362 0.00496 0.03843 0.05272

According to standard EN 10020: 2000 both the base metal and the filler metal is non-alloy. The high
value of Mn specially in base metal increases the weldability of the base metal and also forms MnS
phase which is globular in shape which increases the strength of the weld.[4]

Figure 14: Effect of Mn in weld metal

25
Effect of Structure

Macrostructure

Figure 15: Macroscopic view of the welded joint showing different zones

Microstructure

Figure 16: Microstructure at deposited zone

From the microstructure of the deposited zone we can see that its pearlite fine layers surrounded
by ferrite matrix. This kind of composite structure is the reason behind greater hardness than other
zones. This kind of structure forms because of faster cooling rate while it solidified from liquid metal
to solid and as a result the grains didn’t get enough time to grow.

26
 Figure 17: Microstructure of the Heat affected zone (HAZ); (a)Coarsen Zone (b)Refine Zone
(c)Transition Zone

From these microstructures we can observe the transition from deposited zone to base metal. As
these zones are within heat affected zone (HAZ) they are formed due to solid state reaction. This
region got above the austenitic temperature as the work piece being welded and cooled down. The
cooling rate was fastest at the coarsen zone as it is closest to the deposited zone and slowest at the
transition zone as it is adjacent to base metal which is unaffected. The ferrite grain growth starts at
coarsen zone and ends at transition zone. These variable structures may be the cause of bad
mechanical properties.

Figure 18: Microstructure of Base metal

From the microstructure of base metal, we can observe that it is unaffected by the welding process
as temperature of the base metal didn’t cross the austenitic temperature. There are separates grains
of ferrite and pearlite and the grain size is much larger than the previous structure.

27
Comparison of Hardness

Figure 19: Hardness levels at different zones showed as color map

Hardness Sample (Base Metal) Hardness Sample (Filler Metal)

0.04324 0.15915 0.12496 0.03843 0.05272 0.16897
0.21034 0.00496
0.00311
0.01362 0.10579
0.01194
1.7498

0.71953

C Si Mn P S Ni Cr C Si Mn P S Ni Cr

Table 6: Comparison of Hardness between theoretical and Measured hardness

Theoretical Hardness Measured Hardness

Position UNS Number
(HV) (HV)
Base Metal G13300 271 183
Filler Metal G10180 131 203

Hardness is the highest at the deposited zone and lowest at the Heat Affected Zone (HAZ). At base
metal the theoretical hardness is greater than the measured hardness and for filler metal measured
hardness is higher than the theoretical hardness.

28
Tensile Testing

Mode of Failure

(a) (b)

(c)

Figure 20: (a) Tensile test sample after testing (b) Fracture view (c) Fracture surface

Comparison with standard (UNS)

Tensile Sample
0.0185
0.0173 0.0125
0.018
0.175
0.304 0.135

C Si Mn P S Ni Cr

According to compositional range of the sample, UNS number of the sample is G10200. So, we can
compare with standard values.

29
 Table 7: Comparison with standard values using UNS number

Properties Standard values Experimental values

UTS (MPa) 420 345

YS (MPa) 350 328

% Elongation 15% 12.5%

Comparison with standard requirements

Table 8: Comparison of the tested sample according to QW-153

Requirements Results

Should break at Base Metal The sample broke at the base metal

The UTS of the sample is 345 MPa which

Tensile Strength: 400 – 420 MPa
don’t fulfill the requirements

30
Guided Bend Test

Mode of Failure

Figure 21: Guided bend sample after bending showing both face and root portions

Comparison with standard (UNS)

Face Bend Sample Root Bend Sample

0.0178 0.013 0.0204 0.0062 0.0189 0.0157
0.0185
0.0136
0.0156
0.13
0.176

0.311 0.134 0.703

C Si Mn P S Ni Cr C Si Mn P S Ni Cr

According to compositional range of the sample, UNS numbers of the face bend and root bend
samples are G10200 and G10180. So, we can compare with standard values. According to UNS
numbers, UTS of the samples should be 420 MPa and 440 MPa and yield strength is 350 MPa and
370 MPa. There was no standard data for guided bend test from UNS number. Maximum applied
stress was 26 MPa and 34 MPa for face and root bend test.

31
Comparison with standard requirements

Table 9: Comparison of bend test according to QW-163

Requirements Results

The sample bent 1800 without

Face bend Test Presence of No discontinuity in the Weld
any fracture and discontinuity

The sample bent 1800 without

Root bend Test Presence of No discontinuity in the Weld
any fracture and discontinuity

Nick Break Test

Mode of Failure

Figure 22: Nick Break test sample showing weld fracture surface and defects

Intentionally the weld joint was broken. The weld fracture surface is porous and the sample failed
by brittle fracture mode.

32
Comparison with standard (UNS)

0.0131
Nick Break Sample
0.0084 0.0229 0.0659
0.0097

0.191

1.54

C Si Mn P S Ni Cr

According to compositional range of the sample, UNS number of the sample is G15130. So, we can
compare with standard values. According to UNS numbers UTS of the sample should be 390-510
MPa and yield strength 275 MPa. There was no standard data for nick break test from UNS number.
The Notch Tensile strength was 233 MPa.

Comparison with standard requirements

Table 10: Comparison of Nick break test according to API 1104 (5.6.3.3)

Requirements Results

From the weld fracture complete

Complete penetration and fusion
penetration was confirmed

There were some gas pockets larger than

Gas pocket shall not exceed 1.6 mm
1.6 mm in the sample

33
 Chapter 6 CONCLUSION

From the above tests we find out that, composition and cooling rate of base alloy and filler alloy
plays an important role in microstructure and hardness. Microstructural investigation showed that,
thin dispersed pearlite in ferrite matrix gives better hardness than only ferrite and pearlite separate
grains. Moreover, higher cooling rate helps to form fine structures which is good for properties. But
care should be taken so that, no brittle phase forms and residual stress is relieved properly
otherwise it will affect the properties negatively.

Tensile test, guided bend test and nick break test showed that, the performance of our tested
sample is somewhat moderate. But test results should not be overvalued as the comparison is
somewhat faulty because the test sample were not prepared properly according to standards.

But overall these tests gave us a good test of how to test welded joints properly according to
standards, what variables influence joint properties and what kinds of care should be taken to test
those samples so that, we can get good accurate results which can be compared properly and hence
give us confidence on our welded joints.

34
Reference

[1] ASME, 2007 BPVC Section IX - Welding and Brazing Qualifications. ASME, 2007.
[2] AWS, STUDY GUIDE FOR API STANDARD 1104 - WELDING OF PIPELINES AND RELATED
FACILITIES - TWENTIETH EDITION (HISTORICAL, 20th edition. Miami, FL: AWS, 2006.
[3] BSi, BS EN ISO 1043-1:2011+A1:2016. BSi, 2011.
[4] S. Aihara, M. Sugiyama, G. Shigesato, and R. Uemori, “Microstructural Control of Weld Heat-
Affected Zone of Steel by Mn Depletion around Non-metallic Inclusions,” no. 91, p. 6, 2005.

35
 Appendix A

Work Summary

1st week

1. Weld inspection

Observing welding joints in pipe in different positions

2. Hardness measurement:

Grinding one side of the sample using emery paper

Measuring Vickers hardness in 7 different places of welded specimen

2nd week

1. Macro and Micrographic examination of welded joints

Grinding sample using 120, 320, 600, 800, 1200CW emery paper

Polishing sample

Taking microstructure in different zones of the welding using microscope

2. OES: determining composition of sample in Base and weld area

3rd week

1. Tensile test

2. Root bend test

3. Face bend test

4. Nick break test

4th week

OES of Tensile, Root bend face bend and nick break test sample

36
 Appendix B

Welding Qualification forms and others

Three forms are filled which are specific to welding and welding inspection and testing. They are:

Welding Procedure Specification (WPS): According to QW – 482

Procedure Qualification Records (PQR): According to QW – 483

Welder Performance Qualifications (WPQ): According to QW – 484A & QW – 484B

37
38
39
40
41
42
43