You are on page 1of 12

Welding Research

Sponsored by the Welding Research Council

(WRC)
1972

S U P P L E M E N T TO T H E W E L D I N G J O U R N A L , O C T O B E R

A Simplified Method for Calculating Cooling Rates in Mild and Low Alloy Steel Weld Metals
BY E M I L G . S I G N E S Inserting a thermocouple immediately behind the weld puddle during SMA W test run

Four steps are given for predicting cooling rates when welding by the GMA W-argon, GMAW-CO 2, SMAW and SAW processes

E.G. SIGNES is Engineer. Alloy Development Section, Homer Research Laboratories, Bethlehem Steel Corp., Bethlehem, Pa.

ABSTRACT. A simple method has been devised for predicting weld metal cooling rates for mild and low alloy steels. In this method the values t o be plugged into an equation for predicting the cooling rates are supplied by figures and tables w h i c h summarize relationships based on data obtained in our experimental program in w h i c h cooling rates of more than 3 0 0 bead-on-plate welds were measured. In this program the heat input was varied from 15 to 90 k J / i n . , the preheat temperature from 70 to 4 0 0 F. Beads w e r e deposited on plates of f r o m 3 / 1 6 to 3 in. thickness w i t h the gas metal-arc welding

(GMAW) process, using both argon and C 0 2 shielding gases, t w o different composition wires, and t w o different composition base plates. The submerged arc welding (SAW) and manual shielded metal-arc w e l d ing (SMAW) processes were also studied. Cooling rates w e r e also determined for each pass of t w o multipass welds. W i t h i n the range studied, cooling rates for given welding conditions were not significantly changed by variations in argon shielded G M A W electrode diameter, base plate composition, or use of S M A W . However, cooling rates of G M A W - C 0 2 473-s

WELDING RESEARCH SUPPLEMENT!

THICK PLATE (3D)

C o n t r i b u t i o n s of Studies

Previous

INTERMEDIATE-THICKNESS PLATE (2.5D)


^ -A WELD 7

THIN PLATE,SURFACE TRANSFER INSIGNIFICANT (2D)


.
WELD BEAD

VERY THIN PLATE,SURFACE TRANSFER SIGNIFICANT (2D+R)

I
m

WELD BEAD

M II

t 1
flow

Fig. IFour types of heat

welds and of SAW welds were significantly slower than the above rates. The differences between the bead-on-plate cooling rates and those found for the multipass welds were small. Given the data and relationships determined in our experimental work, w e now have a method of predicting the weld metal cooling rate over the entire range of plate thicknesses in mild and low alloy steels for both argon and C 0 2 shielded G M A welding, and for submerged-arc and manual S M A w e l d ing. Furthermore, w h e n acceptable welding conditions have been determined for one given thickness of plate, w e can use another method, also developed in this study, to find either the heat input or preheat temperature that would be required to produce the same cooling rate in some other thickness of plate. Taken together, these methods comprise a practical tool for welding engineers concerned w i t h achieving desirable weld properties by controlling the w e l d metal cooling rate. Introduction It has long been known that w h e n 474-s | O C T O B E R 1 9 7 2

low strength structural steels are welded, both the w e l d metal and the heat-affected zone are stronger than the base metal through the entire range of welding conditions. However, in the case of the higher strength quenched and tempered steels, the w e l d metal or heat-affected-zone, or both, may not be as strong as the base metal if the postweld cooling rate is too slow. Furthermore, cracking may occur in either zone if the cooling rate is too fast. For these reasons, it has been found necessary, w h e n welding these higher strength steels, to specify welding conditions that w i l l result in an acceptable rate of cooling. Although many studies 1 - 1 3 have dealt w i t h heat flow and the determination of codling rates in welding, investigators have not as yet presented an empirically determined method for calculating the w e l d metal cooling rate over the entire range of plate thicknesses for G M A W , S M A W and S A W that would require only the following input variables: plate thickness, preheat temperature, and heat input. The purpose of the present study was to develop such a method.

The effect of welding parameters on w e l d metal cooling rates was analyzed by Rosenthal 1 in 1 9 4 1 , and other investigators have since then made important contributions to this f i e l d . 2 - 1 3 These studies established that four different heat f l o w conditions can exist in the cooling weld, depending on the relative plate thickness. These conditions, w h i c h are depicted schematically in Fig. 1, are summarized as follows: 1. Thick plates the heat is conducted approximately radially in all directions into the plate. For brevity, this pattern will be referred to as 3D heat flow. 2. Intermediate-thickness plates given the effect of the bottom surface of the plate, the heat f l o w e n compasses a range of patterns which are transitional between those of thin plates and thick plates. These transitional patterns w i l l be referred to as 2.5D heat flow. 3. Thin plates the heat flow in the plate is parallel to the plate surfaces. This pattern will be referred to as 2D heat flow. 4. Very thin plates w h e n p!ates are very thin, heat transfer by radiation or convection from the plates can become a factor. For example, w h e n very high heat inputs are used in welding quite thin plate, surface transfer is often significant. W e w i l l refer to this pattern as 2D+R, i.e., 2D+Radiation. Rosenthal derived the following equation for the 3D heat-flow condition: (T-T0P

27rK

(D

= 3D cooling rate at temperature T = thermal conductivity of the metal = temperature at w h i c h cooling rate is to be determined To = preheat temperature E = energy input to plate. Adams 4 presented the equation for 2D heat flow: following

ferry0 , p2(T - T0>3 = 27rK c ldTJ ? p " H p ^ v / T


where:

,2>

TY
TT) = 2D cooling rate at temperature T

= density of the base metal

C p = specific heat of the base metal p = thickness of the plate


3D RESION

Jhaveri, Moffatt, and Adams present a chart (redrawn in Fig. 2) w h i c h indicates the cooling rate in the 2.5D and 2D regions relative to the cooling rate in the 3D region. Figure 3 is a chart w h i c h they developed to show the effect of radiation on cooling rate. There are difficulties in using the preceding analyses, however. First of all, an essential term in the equation the energy input term is subject to error. That is, the actual value of this term depends on the efficiency w i t h w h i c h the energy is transferred across the arc into the plate, and published values for this efficiency are not in agreement. Thus, for the gas tungsten-arc (GTAW) process, arc efficiencies ranging from 21 to 4 8 % have been reported; for the G M A W process and the S M A W process, efficiencies from 66 to 8 5 % have been reported; and for submerged arc welding (SAW) the reported range is 75 to
9 9 % . 7-10.14

p Cp P 2 ( T ' T o ) ,RELATIVE

THICKNESS

Fig. 2Relation between plate thickness and cooling rate (Ref. 5)

tions of preheat temperature heat input in the 3D region, determined B in the equation: (T-To)

and and

Secondly, the physical properties required for these equations and charts do not lend themselves to unequivocal determination, since they vary w i t h temperature, and during cooling the temperature in the plate varies from T 0 to the weld metal temperature. W h a t is more, the variation w i t h temperature is not a simple one, as witness the variation of specific heat w i t h temperature for a low carbon steel (Fig. 4). In order to avoid these difficulties, Dorschu 1 0 measured the w e l d metal cooling rates for various combina-

(3a)

for T = 1 0 0 0 F and 1 3 0 0 F, and found that, respectively: dj -3 QOOpjoF

= 3 7 7 x 1 0

(3b)

'1000

(s)
\ h

^3(1300-T0)2 3.03x10

(3c)

where d T / d t is in deg(F)/sec. E is the

heat input measured at the welding head, not the actual heat input to the plate, Ep, of Equation 1. The relationship between the t w o measures of heat input is Ep = zE, w h e r e z = arc efficiency. Dorschu used the G M A W process, w i t h an 0.045 in. diam E70S-3 electrode deposited w i t h an a r g o n - 1 % oxygen shielding gas on mild steel plate. Coppolecchia also studied 3D cooling in the shielded metal-arc welding process. 14 He concluded that arc efficiency in the S M A W process was about 10% lower than in the G M A W process. According to the relationships discussed above, this 10% difference in efficiency means that the manual w e l d would cool about 10% faster than the gas metalarc weld.

Fig. 3Relation between surface heat transfer and cooling rate (Ref. 5)

Fig. 4Specific heat of iron vs. tempera ture WELDING RESEARCH SUPPLEMENT! 475-s

All-Weld-Metal Run .045" A675 wire, argon + 1% 02 gas Mild steel base plate 45 kji - 200F preheat/Interpass 1300F Cooling Rate

pass to find out whether there was much variation from the first to the last pass.
dT/dt 83.2 76.8 83.2 83.2 83.2 83.2 71.4 71.4 76.8

ass 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

dT/dt 50.0

Pass

*
65.8 71.4 76.8 81.6 83.2 73.0

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Materials and Equipment Mild steel was welded w i t h E70S3 (C-Mn-Si) electrodes. Both 0.045 and 0.062 in. diam wires were used; shielding w a s done w i t h both argon1 % oxygen and C 0 2 gases. A proprietary (Ni-Mo-Cr-V) electrode wire was used to weld ASTM A 5 1 7 Grade M. Manual welding (SMAW) combinations used were E7018 electrodes deposited on mild steel and E12018M on A 5 1 7 M. A submergedarc f l u x / f i l l e r metal combination F62EL12 was used w i t h mild steel base plate. Temperature measurements were made w i t h 0.020 inch diam Pt/Pt10Rh thermocouples for all but the submerged arc runs. In the latter case, the fact that the slag had to be penetrated by the thermocouple made the puddle diffcult to find, and melting of the thermocouple was common. Therefore, w e used 0.020 in. diam W - 5 R e / W - 2 6 R e thermocouples, w h i c h melt at temperatures substantially higher than the P t / P t 10Rh couples. The cooling curves were recorded on a Leeds and Northrup Speedomax H recorder.

4 3"
T

BACK-UP

* Thermocouple melted

off

Procedure Plate .045" A632 wire, argon + 1% 0 2 gas ASTM A517 Grade J base plate 60 kji - 70F preheat/interpass Arc-Air Back Grooved

1300F Cooling Rate Pass 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 dT/dt

83.8 76.8 71.4 76.8 76.8 83.2 76.8 69.2 66.6

* Thermocouple melted off

Fig. 5 All-weld-metal and procedure plate runs. Terms A675 and A632 wire represent E70S-3 and a proprietary (Ni-Mo-Cr- V) bare wire electrode respectively; kji = kJ/in.

Test Program Although these previous investigations had resulted in helpful equations, the equations as such did not lend themselves to being integrated into a simplified method of predicting weld metal cooling rates for a full range of plate thicknesses. Restricting ourselves in the present test program to mild steel welds and low alloy steel welds minimized the problem of physical property variation and therefore overcame one of the problems in the way of developing an equation capable of forming part of a practical method of predicting weld metal cooling rates. As contrasted w i t h Dorschu and Coppolecchia's programs at Airco, our test program included plate thicknesses from 3 / 1 6 to 3 in. thick, thus providing data for the various heat flow conditions. Our testing also differed from Dorschu's study in that the range of heat inputs was expanded to reflect commercial welding conditions. Although Dorschu's work was generally restricted to heat inputs in the 10-30 k j / i n . range, heat inputs in actual practice are usually much higher, 476-s I O C T O B E R 1 972

that is, up to 9 0 k J / i n . for G M A W and S M A W process welds and even higher for submerged arc welds. Granted that for 3D heat flow the relationships determined by Dorschu could be expected to apply to the entire range of heat inputs, w e designed our tests for the full range of heat inputs not only to provide verification of previous 3D results but, more important, to provide a realistic data basis for the 2D and intermediate heat f l o w cases covering the realistic range of heat inputs 15 to 90 k J / i n . In general, w e varied heat input by changing the travel speed, leaving current and voltage constant; however, w e also studied the effects of changing the heat input by varying these settings instead of the travel speed. G M A W , S M A W and S A W processes were studied. In the case of the G M A W process, the effect of shielding gas and of electrode diameter was studied. The effect of different weld m e t a l / b a s e metal combinations was also studied for both the G M A W and the S M A W processes. For multipass welding, cooling curves were determined for each

Welding and Recording Procedure We had to make sure that the plates were long enough and wide enough that the plate edges did not affect the heat flow. W e did not determine a m i n i m u m permissible length, but all welds w e r e made on 18 in. long plate, w h i c h is very much longer than necessary. To determine the m i n i m u m permissible w i d t h , w e deposited beads on plates of various thicknesses and widths, w i t h 9 0 k J / i n . heat input and 4 0 0 F preheat. We found that, for plate under 1 in. thick, a 9 in. w i d t h w a s necessary to avoid edge effects in cooling as low as 500 F, that is, a bead deposited on any plate 9 in. wide or wider had the same cooling rate for a given set of welding parameters. For plates 1 in. thick and thicker, a 6 in. w i d t h was sufficient. Therefore, all welds on 3 / 1 6 , 1/4, 1 / 2 , and 3 / 4 in. plate were made on 1 8 in. long x 9 in. wide plate; all welds on 1, 1 V4, 11/2, 2, and 3 in. plate were made on 18 x 6 in. plate. All welds were made in the flat position, in still air, on plates w i t h asrolled surfaces. Mostly single beadon-plate runs were made. As the arc passed the mid-length of the w e l d , a thermocouple was inserted into the molten pool directly behind the arc. The time-temperature cycle was recorded until the w e l d had cooled below 500 F.

Table 1 Welding Conditions* and 1 300 F Cooling Rates for Welds in Base Program

Code
3 / 1 6 in . plate |307

dT/dt

Code
3/4 in plate

dT/dt

Code
11/2 in.plate

dT/dt

301 331 308 309 310 302 326 303 327 304 328 324 305 329

70 70 70 70 70 70 150 150 200 200 300 300 400 400 400

15 30 40 45 60 75 30 60 30 60 30 60 15 30 60

74.1 15.0 9,8 8 . 1 5,7 4.3 14.3 5.6 12.6 5.5 11.1 5.0 25.3 9.9 4.9

Q10 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7 Q12 Q8 Q13 Q9 Q11 Q14

70 70 70 200 200 200 200 300 300 400 400 400

45 60 90 15 30 60 90 30 90 30 45 90

95.2 60.6 32.3 285.7 1 17.6 45.5 26.3 95.2 18.9 87.0 47.6 1 5.6

H5 H15 H6 H7 H16 H8 H13 H9 H14 H11

200 200 300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400

60 90 30 60 90 30 45 60 75 90

52.6 28.6 95.2 44.4 25.0 80.0 48.8 40.8 28.6 18.2

2 in. plate

1 in. plate i

1/4 in. plate

402 401 403 404 405 406 407 414 408 409 410
41 1

412

70 70 70 70 200 200 200 300 300 300 400 400 400

15 30 60 90 15 30 60 15 30 60 15 30 60

153.8 22.2 8.7 4.4 100.0 17.7 6.9 83.3 16.9 6 . 1 55.6 12.8 5.1

1/2 in. plate

202 201 214 203 204 205 206 207 216 208 209 217 210 211 215 212

70 70 70 70 70 200 200 200 200 300 300 300 400 400 400 400

15 30 45 60 90 15 30 60 90 30 60 90 15 30 45 60

285.7 111.1 45.5 30.8 11.4 250.0 80.0 20.8 8 . 1 69.0 16.0 6.3 166.7 55.6 21.1 12.8

102 102R 101 1 16 103 104 105 105R 106 1 17 107 107R 121 1 15 108 1 18 109 120 110 11 OR 111 1 MR 119 1 12
11 2R

114

70 70 70 70 70 70 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 300 300 300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

15 15 30 45 60 90 15 15 30 45 60 60 90 15 30 45 60 75 15 15 30 30 45 60 60 90

285.7 333.3 142.9 90.9 69.0 39.2 250.0 285.7 105.3

74.1 54.1 48.8 29.0 200.0 95.2 58.8 42.6 31.3 166.7 166.7 80.0 80.0 50.0 40.0 31.3 19.8

. plate 11/4 in

34 34R 1 1R 7 8 8R 48 35 35R 2 37 46 46R 9 3 10 38 38R 49 36 39 50 45R 11 5 43 40 40R 44 47

70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 150 150 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 300 300 300 400 400 400 400 400 400 400 400

15 15 30 30 45 60 60 75 90 90 30 60 15 15 24 30 45 60 60 90 30 60 90 15 24 30 45 60 60 75 90

333.3 333.3 153.8 153.8 90.9 69.0 71.4 54.1 42.6 37,0 142.9 74.1 250.0 222.2 166,7 133,3 74.1 66.7 54.1
35.1 111.1 57.1 28.6 153.8 125.0 90.9 62.5 55 6 35.1 39.2 22.7

1Q1 1Q2 1Q3 1Q4

70 70 70 70

30 45 60 90

142.9 111.1 66.7 35.1

3 in . plate T1 T10 T2 T7 T12 T8 T13 T9 T1 1 T4 T5 70 70 70 200 200 300 300 400 400 400 400 30 75 90 60 90 60 90 60 75 90 90
153.8 57.1 45.5 55.6 34.5 43 5 29.4 37.0 28.2 23.3 22.7

V/z in. plate

3/4 in . plate

Q2 Q1

70 70

15 30

333.3 142.9

H1 H12 H2 H3 H4

70 70 70 70 200

30 45 60 90 30

153.8 87.0 66.7 45.5 125.0

'T0= preheat temperature F. E heat input, kj in. riT dt 1 300 F cooling rate. deg(F) sec In all cases, 0 045 in E70S- 3 was deposited on mild steel, argor* * 1% oxygen gas: 27v, 250 amp, bead-on-plate welds

The temperature scale on the chart paper was not linear; hence, cooling rates could not be directly determined by measuring the slope at a given temperature. Rather, the time for the weld to cool from 2 5 0 0 to 2000, 1500, 1400 and on d o w n to 500 F in 100 F increments was recorded; average cooling rates be-

tween various temperatures then be determined.

could

Test Program in Detail The first part of the program, henceforth referred to as the base program, consisted of empirically determining, for mild steel, graphs similar to those determined by

Adams 5 (Fig. 2 and 3), w i t h only thickness, heat input, preheat temperature, and cooling rate as parameters. For this purpose, 145 beads were deposited, the following ranges being used: Plate t h i c k n e s s - 3 / 1 6 to 3 in. Heat input-1 5 to 90 k J / i n . Preheat t e m p e r a t u r e - 7 0 to 4 0 0 F. 477-s

WELDING RESEARCH SUPPLEMENT!

Table 2 Series T e s t e d in S e c o n d Phase of P r o g r a m Series A RB SX CO 70M RBM SAT Process GMAW GMAW GMAW GMAW SMAW SMAW SAW Electrode 0.045 in. 0.045 in. 0 . 0 6 2 in. 0.045 i n . E7018 E12018 EL12 diam diam diam diam E70S-3 (Ni-Mo-Cr-V) E70S-3 E70S-3 Flux or shielding Argon Argon Argon CO, Base metal Mild steel A 5 1 7 Grade M M i l d steel M i l d steel M i l d steel A 5 1 7 Grade M M i l d steel

In a l l c a s e s , E 7 0 S - 3 w a s d e p o s i t e d on mild steel. The G M A W process w i t h a r g o n s h i e l d i n g gas w a s used, and the heat input w a s varied by changing the travel speed, the voltage and c u r r e n t being m a i n t a i n e d , at 2 7 v a n d 2 5 0 a m p , r e s p e c t i v e l y . A d e s c r i p t i v e l i s t of t h e s e r u n s is g i v e n in Table 1. T h e o b j e c t of t h e s e c o n d p h a s e of this program w a s to determine the e f f e c t s of p r o c e s s , e l e c t r o d e s i z e , shielding gas, and composition on cooling rate. Table 2 p r e s e n t s t h e v a r i o u s s e t s of c o n d i t i o n s t e s t e d . Only beads w h i c h obeyed threedimensional heat transfer w e r e deposited. Each series, w i t h the except i o n of t h e s u b m e r g e d a r c s e r i e s , c o n s i s t e d of t h e f o l l o w i n g r u n s ;

F62-EL12

Table 3 1 3 0 0 F C o o l i n g Rates f o r W e l d s in Series D e t a i l e d in Table 2 ( a .(b)

Code - 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 -21 -22 -26 -36 -46

To 70 70 70 70 70 70 200 200 200 300 400

E 15 30 45 60 75 90 15 30 90 90 90

A 333.3 153.8 90.9 69.0 54.1 41.7 250.0 133.3 35.1 278 21.7

RB 303.0 156.3 100.0 794 60.6 49.3 256.4 138.9 41.0 36.6 31.8

SX 333.3 153.8 96 2 69.0 50.8 44.4 2778 123.5 39.2 29.9 26.2

CO 285.7 122 0 89.3 52.6 41.7 33.7 232.6 91.7 290 23.9 19.4

70M 277.8 133.3 100 0 74.1 64.5 64.5 285.7 113.5 41.5 34.5 308

RBM 285.7 1299 1250 909 71.4 606 285.7 133.3 55 6 360 309

SAT

Heat input. Code -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 -21 -22 -26 -36 .46

870 52.6 42.0 32 5 25.5

kJ/iri.
15 30 45 60 75 90 15 30 90 90 90

Preheat temp, F

800 248 16.0 14.2

250 amp. Series CO,28 v. (a| Bead-on-plate welds made at the following power settings Series A. RB and SX, ^ . ... ^ v .. 230 amp; Series 70M and RBM, 24 v, 230 amp. Series SAT. 30 v. 500 amp See Table 2 for general conditions (b}T0 = preheat temp, F; E heat input kj in dT dt 1 300 F cooling rale rieg(F) sec

70 70 70 70 70 70 200 200 200 300 400

T h e travel speed in t h e 15 k J / i n . runs w a s too fast for t h e t h e r m o couples to be i n s e r t e d in t h e s u b m e r g e d arc puddle, and for this reason t h e s u b m e r g e d arc series does not include these t w o runs.

Table 4 1 3 0 0 F C o o l i n g Rates f o r W e l d s in w h i c h V o l t a g e and A m p erage w e r e Varied ( a ) l b | Voltage varied, ipm travel speed Code 21 20 19 1 22 23 Tn 70 70 70 70 70 70 22.2 24.4 266 30.0 33.4 35.6 27 250 amp and 13 5

Table 5 Results of Regression A n a l y s i s (Part 1 a n d 2) dT' (Part 1] dt. (1 3 0 0 - To )2 ( B 0 forced to be zero) Standard error of estimate 781 5.24 4.94 5.62 790 14.4 4.63

Volts 20 22 24 27 30 32 and

dT/dt 181.8 166.7 153.8 153.8 142.9 142.9 135

Series of Table 2 A RB SX CO 70M RBM SAT

B, x 1 0 2.95 3.16 294 2.34 2.87 3.18 1.74

Avg. % error 12.6 5.3 6.2 9.6 9.1 11.9 9.6

Amperage varied, ipm travel speed Code 26 25 24 1 27 28 29 To 70 70 70 70 70 70 70 24.0 26.4 28.8 30.0 31.2 33.6 36.0

dT 3D Amp 200 220 240 250 260 280 300 dT/dt 181.8 181.8 166.7 153.8 142.9 142.9 117.6 (Part 2) dt 1300 = B 0 ^ B,

( 1 3 0 0 - T0)2 E (B 0 not forced Standard error of estimate 5.93 5 59 3.98 509 5 50 12.8 4.55

Series of Table 2 A RB SX CO 70M RBM SAT

Bo -10.8 -6.75 -629 -5.84 11.7 15.9 -3.53

B, x 10 3.29 3.18 3.13 2.53 2.50 2.68 1.85

Avg. % error 5.9 5.4 6.5 7.4 7.2 12.5 7.5

(a) To preheat temp. F. E heat input, kj i n . dT dt 1 300 F cooling rate. deg(F) sec (b) In all cases bead-on-plate welds were made, using 0 0 4 5 in diam E70S-3 electrode on 2 in mild steel plate with argon-1% oxygen shielding

478-s I O C T O B E R

1 972

In each case, the voltage and amperage combination w h i c h gave the best operating characteristics was chosen; heat input w a s varied by means of the travel speed. Cooling rates for the 11 runs of each of the 7 series (except for Series SAT, as explained above) are given in Table 3. In order to determine the effect of changing the heat input by varying the voltage and amperage, t w o short series, detailed in Table 4, w e r e performed. To find out w h e t h e r the cooling rate in a multipass w e l d would vary from pass to pass, w e determined w e l d metal cooling curves of each pass in both a double-vee grooved procedure plate and a single-vee grooved, all-weld-metal procedure plate. The joint configurations and welding conditions are given in Fig. 5. Results and Discussion 1300 F Cooling rate The temperature scale on our chart paper w a s not linear, so that determination of cooling rates by means of a tangent to the t i m e temperature curve was not possible. The cooling rate w h i c h w e determined w a s the average cooling rate between 1400 and 1 2 0 0 F, w h i c h is the temperature range just above the range in w h i c h mild steel w e l d metal transforms on cooling. This average cooling rate w i l l henceforth be referred to as the 1 3 0 0 F cooling rate. Even though they might not be identical, the difference between these t w o measures of cooling rate is quite small. This measure of cooling rate was chosen because it is near the transformation temperature and because it was found to correlate well w i t h weld metal strength. The 1300 F cooling rates for each of the series described above are given

in Tables 1, 3 and 4 for bead-on-plate and Fig. 5 for multipass welds. Determination of Heat Transfer Conditions Having determined the cooling rate for each run, w e plotted a graph similar to A d a m s ' first chart (Fig. 2) in order to be able to separate 3D, 2.5D, and 2D cooling W e plotted V, vs. H , where: E (dT/dt) 13QO (1300 - T 0 ) 2 ( 1 3 0 0 - To)

all runs w h e r e H 2 <3.5 (and these points have been omitted from Fig. 6, since this figure represents only those cases w h e r e radiation is insignificant). Note that K, P, and C p are not included in these parameters, since their values would not be expected to vary from one grade to another w i t h in the range of steels included in this study. In summary, f r o m these curves w e have determined the following: For 3D cooling 2.5D cooling 2D cooling 2D+R cooling H, 5 H, H, >40 <H, <40 <5, H;>3.5 < 5 , H, < 3 . 5

'

and E is in k i l o j o u l e s / i n c h , T 0 in F, d T / d t in deg(F)/second and p in inches. Both V , and H , are n o n normalized versions of the d i m e n sionless parameters used by Adams as, respectively, the ordinate and abscissa in Fig. 2. All 145 runs of the base program were represented in this plot, w h i c h is s h o w n in Fig. 6. This plot shows that there is no effect of thickness f o r H , > 4 0 . The 2D cooling region should be represented by a straight line passing through the origin, and this is approximately the case w h e n H , < 5. To determine the region in w h i c h radiation is important, w e plotted Fig. 7, similar to A d a m s ' chart s h o w n in Fig. 3. Here w e plotted V 2 vs. H , w h e r e : p;(1300-T0P V, = E* (dT/dt), 30o p?(1200-T0) E(p),/2 and V 2 and H2 are non-normalized versions of the dimensionless parameters of Fig. 3. From this figure it is evident that radiation is important for

The 3 D / 2 . 5 D and 2D/2D+R crossover points have been used to construct Fig. 8. By using this figure, one can rapidly determine w h i c h heat flow condition exists for any given set of parameters. This figure also indicates that the cooling condition is a function of the welding condition in addition to thickness. This plot does not distinguish between the 2D. and 2.5D regions, but this distinction is not necessary in the method, detailed instructions for w h i c h are given in the section on Method for Determining Cooling Rate. Determination of 3D Equation Base Program. Of the 145 runs in the base program, 70 were found to obey 3D cooling behavior at 1300 F. Using the method of stepwise linear regression, w e determined that the coefficient B, in the following equation is 3.12 x 10- 3 : ( 1 3 0 0 ^ '
1300

dT dt/

Comparison of Processes. As stated previously, only welding condi-

.005
,2.004

..003

> .001

10

20

30 40 50 H, = p 2 (l300-To) / E

60

Fig. 6 Representation of data for 1300F cooling. Presentation form is similar to that in Fig. 2

Fig. 7 Representation of data for 1300F cooling. Presentation form is similar to that in Fig. 3 WELDING RESEARCH SUPPLEMENT! 479-s

* *

^v *.. ^

where B 0 , theoretically zero, is the value of (dT/dt) ,3oo for (1 300-T 0 )2 / E = 0. To determine the practical validity of this assumption, w e also determined both B 0 and B, in Equation 6; the results appear in Table 5. If w e look at the columns labeled "Standard Error of Estimate" and "Average % Error," w e will notice that, except for Series A, the latter analysis is only slightly more accurate than the former. That is, the error to be expected w h e n using Equation 5 w i l l generally not be much more than that from Equation 6. Consequently, w e are justified in continuing to use Equation 5 w h i c h represents a great deal of convenience at the sacrifice of only a small amount of accuracy. From now on, therefore, w h e n w e refer to the coefficient B, for a given series w e will be referring to that given in Table 5 (Part 1). To determine whether there were any significant differences between the different series, w e employed a statistical analysis known as Hald's method. 1 5 This analysis revealed that, at the 9 5 % significance level, there was no statistical difference between the coefficients Bi determined for all of the G M A W - a r g o n and S M A W series (A, RB, SX, 7 0 M , and RBM). On the other hand, the BTs for the series CO and SAT (GMAW-C02 and SAW) were significantly different from these B,'s and from each other. The standard error of the RBM series, however, was found to be statistically different from most of the standard errors of estimate in the other series. This difference can be attributed partly to the fact that the t w o biggest deviations from the estimated curve occurred in t w o of the runs w i t h fast cooling rates (RBM 2 and RBM 3). Although the percentage deviation from the curve might be the same at these high values, the residual itself would be high, thus tending to increase the standard error of estimate. Furthermore, w e would expect the manual process to be less reproducible than either of the automatic processes. For example, although the standard error of estimate of series 7 0 M is substantially lower than that of series RBM, it is the second highest in the group. Since the coefficients B, of series A, RB, SX, 7 0 M , and RBM were not found to differ significantly from one another, w e lumped all the runs from these series together and determined an average coefficient B,, w h i c h turned out to be 3.02 x 10~ 3 . The average % error w a s 9.9%. Using the cooling rate data in Table 4, w e determined B, in Equation 1 to be 2.86 x 10~ 3 in the case w h e r e the heat input w a s changed by varying the voltage. However, in

.0 1.5 2.0 PLATE THICKNESS,INCHES


F/g, S A/eaf transfer condition for any combination of plate thickness heat input, and preheat temperature

tions obeying 3D heat transfer were used in this section of the study. This restriction assumes that the relationships between the cooling rates of the various series determined for 3D heat transfer would also hold for the other heat transfer modes. Furthermore in determining the 3D equations in this section, w e excluded the runs for w h i c h E = 1 5 k j / i n . for the following reasons: 1. The travel speed in the 15 k J / i n . runs was too fast for the thermocouple to be inserted in the submerged arc puddle. Thus, by considering only those runs from 3 0 to 9 0 k J / i n . , w e could compare all series on an equal basis. 2. As previously explained, the 1300 F cooling rate was determined by measuring the time to cool from 1400 to 1 2 0 0 F. In the case of the 15 k J / i n . runs, this amount of time 480-s I O C T O B E R 1 972

was quite small, and an accurate measurement was quite difficult. These reasons justified eliminating the 1 5 k J / i n . data, the remaining range of 3 0 - 9 0 k j / i n . being in any event fully representative of practical welding conditions. The coefficients B , in the equations (1300-T0)2

(5)

were determined using the data in Table 3. This was done by assuming the value of zero for coefficient B 0 in the equation

B 0 + B,

(6)

p = thickness, inches To= preheat temperature,F E = heat input,kilo Joules / i n c h

p= thickness, inches To= preheat temperature,F E = heat input,kilo joules/inch 2 3 H2=p2(l300-To)/E/'p-

20 H, = p * ( 0 O O - T o ) / E

30

Fig. 9 Correction factor'P], vs. the parameter f/, valid for all cases where radiation is insignificant

This figure

is

Fig. 10 Correction factor'P2. vs. the parameter Hi. takes into account the effect of radiation on cooling

This

figure

this case the heat input range studied w a s very small, 22.2 to 35.6 k J / i n . , and forcing the equation through zero would artificially force B, to be approximately equal to the B, previously determined. Here, allowing B 0 to vary, as in Equation 6, the slope B, w a s found to be 1.45 x 10" 3 , substantially different from that previously determined. This indicates that varying heat input by changing the voltage has a much smaller effect than varying it by changing the travel speed. Low voltage runs w e r e found to have lower cooling rates, w h i l e high voltage runs had cooling rates higher than those predicted by B, = 2.86 x 10~ 3 . Since the electrode to plate distance decreases as the voltage decreases, w e would expect the arc efficiency to increase as the voltage decreases. This would explain the above behavior. However, the voltage range, 2 0 - 3 2 v, used in this series, w a s far greater than that w h i c h would be used in practice. For our setup, for example, good welding conditions could only be obtained for voltage of about 2 5 28 v. Furthermore, the greatest variation of any cooling rate in this series from that predicted by B, =3.02 x 1 0 " 3 (the average coefficient determined above) was 15%. For these reasons, these results w i l l not prevent us from using this equation. Using the cooling rate data in Table 4, w e determined B, in Equation 1 to be 3.03 x 1 0 " 3 in the case w h e r e the heat input was changed by varying the current. Furthermore, w h e n w e allowed B 0 to vary, B, in Equation 2 was found to be 3.06 x 10~ 3 . These results s h o w that varying the heat input by means of t h e amperage gives results identical to those obtained w h e n varying the heat input by means of the travel speed.

Determination of 2 D

Equation

Although the method to be described later does not require the use of the 2D heat f l o w equation, the coefficient B, in the equation p2(1300E2 (7)

was calculated for the runs in the base program and found to be 2.44 x 10- 4 . Multipass Welds. Since a hemispherical w e l d bead emitting heat into the plate in all directions is closely approximated only by a beadon-plate w e l d and since varying geometry can be expected to affect the cooling rates of the various passes in multipass welds, we measured the cooling rate of each pass in both a single-vee groove and a double-vee groove w e l d , as previously described. Figure 5 gives the 1300 F cooling rate for each run. We can see from these data that in both the single and double vee cases there is some difference between the maximum and the m i n imum cooling rate w i t h i n each plate. In the case of the double-vee grooved procedure plate, the measured cooling rates varied from 67 to 83 F/sec, the average being 76 F/sec. For the single vee plate, the cooling rates varied from 5 0 to 83 F/sec. However, this variation includes the first.three passes w h i c h were greatly influenced by the Vi in. root opening, a gap that is rarely used in anything but all-weld-metal specimens. When these three passes are eliminated from consideration, the range becomes 71 to 8 3 F/sec, w i t h an average of 78 F/sec. In both cases the predicted beadon-plate cooling rate w o u l d have been 72 F/sec, or s o m e w h a t slower

than the measured 76 and 78 F/sec averages. The slightly faster cooling rates in the actual weld tests is attributable to the fact that there is more volume into w h i c h the heat can diffuse from the interior beads, w h i c h appear to cool faster than the exterior beads. For all but the t h i n nest plate, the actual average cooling rates in multipass butt welds w i l l be a little higher than our predicted rates. However, such differences are, as the examples cited show, small enough to permit the practical use of predictions by our method. Therefore, only the bead-on-plate cooling rate measurements w i l l be used in w h a t follows.
Differences Between Our Results and Those of Previous Investigators

Although results obtained in this study agree in many respects w i t h those published elsewhere, our f i n d ings show some significant differences. Our values of B, in the equation

= B
1300

(1300-T 0 ) 2

(8)

are very close to Dorschu's experimental value of 3.03 x 10~ 3 for E70S3 on mild steel. However, the value of B, determined by Coppolecchia for S M A W (manual) is 3.42 x 10" 3 , from w h i c h he concludes that the S M A W process is less efficient than the G M A W process, a result not substantiated by our results. One possible reason for his conclusion may have to do w i t h the fact that he used E14018 electrodes and HY100 base plate, in contrast to the lower strength materials of Dorschu's work. In our work, although there was no statistical difference bet w e e n cooling rates in low and high strength steel w e l d metal, numerical 481-s

WELDING RESEARCH SUPPLEMENT!

jo-

are substantially too high. In fact, assuming a submerged arc efficiency of 1.0 would give z = 0.57 for the GMAW-argon and S M A W processes, and z = 0.74 for G M A W - C 0 2 . M e t h o d for D e t e r m i n i n g Cooling Rate Incorporating the choice of equations based on our experimental results analyzed in the preceding section, w e developed the following four-step method for determining the weld metal cooling rate in any thickness plate of mild or l o w alloy steel butt welded by the G M A W , S M A W or S A W processes. The 1300 F cooling rate was chosen, as explained before, because it is near the transformation temperature and because it was found to correlate well w i t h weld metal strength.
40

ss

-.06

=04

02-

p - thickness , inches To = preheat temperature, F E = heat input, kilo j o u l e s / i n c h -rr- cooling rate,F/second 15 20 /E 25 30 35

I. Determine heat transfer tion from Fig. 8.

condi-

H, P z ( 1 3 0 0 - T o )

Fig. 11 Plot for determining heat input. This curve is valid for all cases where radiation is insignificant

II. Determine the value of </>, (ratio of actual cooling rate to 3-D cooling rate) and </>2(ratio of cooling rate without radiation to actual cooling rate) in accordance w i t h the proper heat transfer condition. (1300-T0)2
2TTK ZE

differences did exist. For both G M A W and S M A W , the higher strength weld metal/base metal combinations cooled somewhat more rapidly than the lower strength combinations. Both E14018 and HY100 are more highly alloyed than even E12018 and A 5 1 7 Grade M; the presence of a higher alloy content may account for the higher coefficient B,. If increased alloy content has such an effect, it may become necessary to determine composition ranges over which given equations can be applied w i t h reasonable accuracy. That the submerged arc process exhibits slower cooling rates than the other processes w a s expected and has been reported by others. 8 Submergence of the arc leads to less heat loss in the arc and therefore a higher heat transfer efficiency. Part of the reason for the slower cooling in C 0 2 welding may also be the increased heat transfer efficiency in this process. For example, it is pointed out in the Welding Handbook 16 that "radiation loss of energy may be over 2 0 % of the total input in the case of argon welding arcs, w h i l e in other welding gases the radiation loss is not more than about 10%." Dorschu and Coppolecchia both estimated the arc efficiency (fraction of input heat that reaches the plate) by assuming a value of thermal conductivity K = 0.068 cal/cmdeg(F)-sec in the modified Rosenthal equation 482-s I O C T O B E R 1 972

(9)

Heat transfer Condition "3D ~~ 2.5 D, 2D 2D + R a d i ation

<t>2

1
From Fig. 9 From Fig. 9 1 From Fig. 1 0

where z = arc efficiency. For G M A W Dorschu's value for z was 0.84, and for S M A W Coppolecchia obtained the value of 0.74 for z. However, using the same formula to derive submerged arc efficiency would give us an efficiency of 1.45, w h i c h would indicate that the values given above

Note that Fig. 9 and 10 w e r e constructed by fitting curves to the data in Fig. 6 and 7 and normalizing the ordinates.

/ /
yS
y ^
^ ^ p = thickness, inches To = preheat temperature,F E * h e a t i n p u t , k i l o j o u l e s / inch T7 = cooling r a t e , F/second

r 2
xi I ~2
a.' UJ

1 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^

^ * ^

15

20

25

30

35

40

= p2 (1300-To) / E

Fig. 12 Plot for determining preheat temperature. This curve is valid for all cases where radiation is insignificant

Specify <t>3 (ratio of actual cooling rate to cooling rate for G M A W - a r g o n process) according to the particular welding process under consideration.

0.5

0.4

a.
G M A W , argon shielded G M A W , CO 2 shielded S M A W (manual) SAW IV. Calculate follows: the cooling rate 1.0 0.77 1.0 0.57 as
Q.JUJ p = thickness , inches 0.10.3

-0.2

= 3.02x10~ -

(10)
2

To = preheat temperature,F E=heat i n p u t , k i l o j o u l e s / i n c h %- = cooling r a t e , F/second at 6 8 10

<M3 (1300-T0)

IT'
where T 0 = preheat temperature, F; E=heat input, k j / i n ; and the left side of the equation equals the cooling rate at 1300 F in deg (F)/sec.
Fig. 13Detail

H, = p 2 ( 1 3 0 0 - T o ) / E

of Fig. 12 for VT <O.S

Methods for Determining Heat Input and Preheat Temperature


If acceptable welding conditions have already been determined for one given thickness of plate, the data developed in this study can also be used to determine either the heat input or preheat temperature that would be required to produce the same cooling rate in some other thickness of plate. To do so, one first calculates the cooling rate for the thickness of plate for w h i c h the w e l d ing conditions are k n o w n , and then proceeds with the methods described below. These methods are based on Fig. 11 and 12, w h i c h have been generated, as w e r e earlier figures, by combining our data w i t h Adams' figures (in this case, Fig. 2 and 3 of Reference 5). It should be noted that these methods are valid for only <2 = 1, that is, where radiation is insignificant. As s h o w n in Fig. 8, this is the case in virtually all plates Vi in. thick and thicker. If this method is used to determine the heat input or preheat temperature for thinner plate, the result should be checked w i t h Fig. 8 to make sure it falls outside the "radiation significant" range. If it does not, the actual heat input or preheat temperature will be somewhat greater than that predicted. To determine the heat input for a given plate thickness, preheat temperature, and cooling rate: I. Specify 4>3 (see Step III of section entitled M e t h o d for Determining Cooling Rate).

II. Determine H, from Fig. 1 1 . If H , > 4 0 , go on to Step III. If H<C40, go on to Step IV. III. For H, > 4 0 , calculate input as follows: E = 3.02x10-3 *
3

the

heat

(130-T>2 < d T / d <), 3 oo

IV. For H,<40, calculate the heat input as follows: P2(1300-T0)


E =

"

H,

where p = plate thickness, inches

To determine the preheat temperature for a given plate thickness, heat input, and cooling rate: I. Specify $ 3 (see Step III of section entitled Method for Determining Cooling Rate). II. Determine H, from Fig. 12, or, if V T (see Fig. 12) is less than 0.5, f r o m Fig. 13. If H,>40, go on to Step III. If H,<40, go on to Step IV. III. For H,>40, calculate the preheat temperature as follows: 332E 1300 *
3

Conclusions On the basis of an experimental program to provide weld metal cooling rate data from tests w i t h both mild and low alloy steels and a wide range of thicknesses, heat inputs, and preheat temperatures representative of commercial practice, w e developed a simple method for predicting the w e l d metal cooling rate from a given set of welding and heat transfer conditions. W i t h i n the range of conditions studied, cooling rates for given welding conditions were not significantly changed by variations in argon-shielded GMAW electrode diameter, base metal composition, or use of manual S M A W . However, cooling rates of welds made by the G M A W - C 0 2 and SAW processes were significantly slower. A cknowledgments The author wishes to thank P. Howe for his help in developing the experimental technique and in performing the experimental work, and G. M. Busch III for his assistance in the manual welding portion of the program. The editoral comments of B S. Mikofsky are greatly appreciated References 1. Rosenthal, D., "Mathematical Theory of Heat Distribution During Welding and Cutting," Welding Journal, 20 (5), May 1941, pp. 220s-225s. 2. Rykalin, N. N., Calculation of Heat Flow in Welding, Hayah Academy, U.S.S.R., 1951, Translated by Zvi Paley and C. M. Adams, Jr 3. Wells, A. A., "Heat Flow in Welding," Welding Journal, 31 (5), May 1952, pp, 263s-267s. 483-s

IV. For H,<40, calculate the preheat temperature as follows: Tn = 1 30 0 H.E

WELDING RESEARCH SUPPLEMENT!

4. Adams, C. M. Jr., "Cooling Rates and Peak Temperatures in Fusion W e l d i n g , " Welding Journal, 37 (5), May 1958, pp. 210s-215s. 5. Jhaveri, P., Moffatt, W. G., and Adams, C. M, Jr., "The Effect of Plate Thickness and Radiation on Heat Flow in Welding and C u t t i n g , " Welding Journal, 41 (1), January 1962, pp. 12s-16s. 6. Barry, J . M., Paley, Z., and A d a m s , C. M. Jr., "Heat Conduction from Moving Arcs in W e l d i n g , " Welding Journal, 42 (3), March 1963, pp. 9 7 s - 1 0 4 s . 7. Paley, Z., Lynch, J . N., and A d a m s , C. M. Jr., "Heat Flow in Welding Heavy Steel Plate," Welding Journal. 43 (2), Feb. 1964, pp. 71s-79s. 8. Christensen, N., Davies, V. de L. and Gjermundsen, K., "Distribution of Temperatures in Arc W e l d i n g , " Brit.

Weld. J., Feb. 1 965, pp. 5 4 - 7 5 . 9. Myers, P. S., Uyehara, 0 . A., and Borman, G L , "Fundamentals of Heat Flow in W e l d i n g , " Welding Research Council Bulletin #123, July 1 967. 10. Dorschu, K. E., "Control of Cooling Rates in Steel Weld M e t a l , " We/ding Journal, Al (2). January 1968, pp. 49s62s. 1 1 . LaFrance, M., Prudhomme, M., Murry, G., Constant, A., "Prevision de la Durete sous Cordon d Aciers A 52 a Partir de I'Etude des Transformations de TAustenite et en Fonction des Conditions de Soudage M a n u e l , " (Prediction of Underbead Hardness of A 52 Steels on the Basis of the Study of Austenite Transformations and As a Function of Manual Welding Conditions), Rev. Met., June 1968, pp. 4 1 7 - 4 2 5 .

12. Bromage, K., " A r c Efficiency and Heat Flow in Inert-Gas W e l d s , " Brit. Weld. J., October 1968, pp. 4 9 3 - 5 0 0 . 13. Bradstreet, B. J., "Effect of Welding Conditions on Cooling Rate and Hardness in the Heat-Affected-Zone," Welding Journal. 48 (11), November 1969, pp. 499s-504s. 14. Coppolecchia, V. D., "Covered Electrode W e l d i n g , The Effects of Welding Variables on Initial W e l d Metal Cooling Rates," Airco Research and Engineering Department Report RE-69, 106-CRE-44, September 15, 1969. 15. Hald, A., Statistical Theory With Engineering Applications, J o h n W i l e y and Sons, New York, 1 9 5 2 , p. 5 7 1 . 16. A m e r i c a n Welding Society, We/ding Handbook, Sixth Edition, Section One, p. 3.22

(1) Sensitivity of the Delta Test t o Steel C o m p o s i t i o n s and Variables by L. J. McGeady

WRC Bulletin No. 172 May 1972

The introduction and use of higher strength heat-treated steels have demonstrated the need for awareness of weldability and fracture problems in the total composite of weld metal, heat-affected zone and plate material. Hence there has developed need for an appropriate test specimen and procedure applicable to the total composite weldment providing the opportunity for failure in any area. This report describes a specimen applicable to this need and to present data to determine whether the proposed specimen, the Delta, allows failures to follow leastresistant paths because of specimen geometry and loading system. It is not the purpose to recommend materials, welding procedures or processes, though it has been necessary to study many of these in a wide variety of combinations to determine their influences on behavior of the specimen. The work reported in this paper was sponsored by the Pressure Vessel Research Committee of the Welding Research Council.

(2) Experimental Stress Analysis and Fracture Behavior of Delta S p e c i m e n s by J. M. Barsom

This investigation was undertaken to analyze the stress distribution in the Delta specimen and to investigate the possible effect of the stress distribution on the flow and fracture behavior of the Delta specimen. The price of WRC Bulletin should be sent to the American 33125. Orders for bulk lots, 10 Research Council, 34.5 East 47th
484-s | O C T O B E R 1 972

172 is $3.00 per copy. Orders for single copies Welding Society, 2501 N.W. 7th St., Miami, Fla. or more copies, should be sent to the Welding Street, New York, N.Y. 10017.

You might also like