Welding International

ISSN: 0950-7116 (Print) 1754-2138 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/twld20

Effect of post-welding heat treatment on the

mechanical and microstructural properties
of extra high-strength steel weld metals, for
application on mooring equipment

Jorge Carlos Ferreira Jorge, Sergio Maciel Faragasso, Luís Felipe Guimarães
de Souza & Ivaní de Souza Bott

To cite this article: Jorge Carlos Ferreira Jorge, Sergio Maciel Faragasso, Luís Felipe Guimarães
de Souza & Ivaní de Souza Bott (2015) Effect of post-welding heat treatment on the mechanical
and microstructural properties of extra high-strength steel weld metals, for application on mooring
equipment, Welding International, 29:7, 521-529, DOI: 10.1080/09507116.2014.932984

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/09507116.2014.932984

Published online: 06 Dec 2014. Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 208 View related articles

View Crossmark data Citing articles: 6 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=twld20
Welding International, 2015
Vol. 29, No. 7, 521–529, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09507116.2014.932984
Selected from Soldagem & Inspec ão 2013 18(2) 138– 148

Effect of post-welding heat treatment on the mechanical and microstructural properties of extra
high-strength steel weld metals, for application on mooring equipment
Jorge Carlos Ferreira Jorgea,b,*, Sergio Maciel Faragassoa1, Luı́s Felipe Guimarães de Souzaa2 and Ivanı́ de Souza Bottc3
a
CEFET/RJ, DIPPG, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil; bFluke Engenharia Ltda., Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil; cPUC-Rio, DEMA,
Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

Evaluation was performed of a weld metal with tensile strength higher than 860 MPa for welding R4 grade steel of standard
W22 of the International Association of Classification Societies, Ltd. Multipass joints were welded with preheating at 200
and 2508C, using the coated electrode process with a 4.0-mm-diameter consumable, the basic composition of which was:
C – 0.06%, Mn – 1.89% and Ni – 2.95%. After welding, mechanical and metallographic tests were performed on samples
entirely removed from the metal deposited in conditions as-welded and after post-weld heat treatment performed at 6008C
for 2 h. The results show that the weld metals obtained have mechanical properties suitable for all conditions of analysis,
providing properties superior to the minimum required for welding R4 grade steel used on petroleum platform mooring
equipment. The metallographic analysis enabled identification of the microstructure and explanation of the behaviour of the
mechanical properties after post-weld heat treatment.
Keywords: weld metal; mechanical properties; post-weld heat treatment

1. Introduction weld metal in the as-welded condition, with no mention of

The expansion of the oil industry in Brazil has greatly
boosted offshore activities, as the largest Brazilian oil
reserves are found in deep water. Semi-submersible
platforms are used to explore for oil in these conditions,
which are positioned with the aid of anchoring systems
that consist of several instruments, including steel shackles
and accessories [1].
To support the stringent requirements for this
application, there are specific rules for proper materials
[2,3] that define extremely complex requirements, as in
most cases there is the need to combine high mechanical
resistance with a high standard of impact toughness.
Table 1 [3] shows the mechanical properties specified
for different grades of steel used for platform anchoring
equipment, according to the International Association of
Classification Societies Ltd (IACS), which standardized
the requirements of all naval classification societies for
this equipment, especially R4 grade steel, currently
extensively used for clamps and anchoring accessories.
This level of requirement of mechanical properties makes
welding of these components a great challenge, not only in
terms of definition of the most suitable welding procedure,
but also primarily in the selection and/or development of
appropriate consumables for the application.
Importantly, in these cases, even the qualification
standards of welding consumables such as AWS A 5.5 [4]
and MIL-E-22200/1F [5] do not define criteria for
approval of consumables for this application, as these
standards are limited to consumables with maximum
resistance of 120 ksi (830 MPa) and are therefore
insufficient to meet requirements for steel such as grade
R4, i.e. 860 MPa tensile yield strength. Additionally, it
should be noted that there is another complicating factor,
since even when specified, the properties are relative to the
maintenance of properties when it is necessary to carry
out heat stress relief treatment, mandatory for anchoring
accessories due to the need to relieve residual stresses of
these components, which operate under severe loading
conditions [6,7].
Therefore, to meet the specific project requirements for
welding these steels, the alternative procedure is used for
qualification of batches of consumables to meet the required
properties of the base metal in the heat-treated condition.
Considering the impossibility of ensuring the supply of
consumables with the required properties with a specific
standard guarantee, a discerning and investigative study is
essential to assess the adequacy of special consumables
available on the market, in order to evaluate the potential
suitability of some of these for the application in question.
In this respect, it is noteworthy that the few available
studies involving weld metals with structural robustness
of the order of 860 MPa or greater [8 –16], although
important from the point of view of analysis of chemical
composition and microstructural evolution, do not address
the effect of post-weld heat treatments on the mechanical
properties of extra high-strength weld metals.
Several studies involving different consumables with
different chemical compositions were carried out, from
which the results shown in Table 2 were obtained [17 –20],
where it is noted that weld metal No. 7 obtained the best
result for impact resistance and toughness after post-weld
heat treatment.
The main objective of this study is to perform a
detailed review and complement the weld metal properties
obtained from the welding consumable which had the best
result among the consumables evaluated in the previous
studies [17 – 20], in meeting the requirements of R4 grade
steel after performing post-weld heat treatment, in order to

*Corresponding author. Email: jorgecfjorge@gmail.com, jorge.jorge@flukeengenharia.com.br

q 2014 Taylor & Francis
522 J.C.J. Ferreira et al.

Table 1. Mechanical properties of steels according to IACS flame. Control of both the preheat and the interpass
standard W22 [3]. temperatures was performed with a properly calibrated
contact pyrometer.
LE LR Al RA Ecv to
Grade (MPa) (MPa) (%) (%) 2 208C (J) Table 4 shows the set of mean parameters used for
welding, while Figure 2 shows the sequence of deposition
R3 410 690 17 50 40 of weld passes.
R3S 490 770 15 50 45
R4 580 860 12 50 50
R4S 700 960 12 50 56
R5 760 1.000 12 50 58 2.3 Post-weld heat treatment (TTPS)
Notes: LE, yield strength; LR, endurance limit; Al-stretching; RA, Heat treatments consisting of heating at 6008C for 2 h were
reduction of area; Ecv, Charpy-V energy. performed, this condition being compared to the condition
of the as-welded joint.
The TTPSs were performed using equipment designed
investigate the influence of this treatment on the
specifically for this purpose, with electric resistance
mechanical properties of the weld metal, and thus the
heating, heat blanket insulation and temperature control
feasibility of using the same consumable for safe welding
via properly calibrated thermocouples. Controlled heating
of anchoring components made of R4 steels.
and cooling rates of 2008C per hour were used.

2. Materials and methods

2.1 Materials
The study was carried out with a commercial coated
electrode, 4.0 mm in diameter, the chemical composition
of which, according to information from the manufacturer,
is presented in Table 3.
2.2 Welding of specimens
The joints were welded from plates with 19 mm thickness
and 700 mm length. The geometry and other dimensions of
the joint are shown in Figure 1. The joints were preheated
at temperatures of 200 and 2508C, using an oxyacetylene
2.4 Mechanical tests
Longitudinal and cross-sectional specimens were removed
from the weld bead for tensile, Charpy-V impact and
hardness tests.
The tensile tests were performed at room temperature
on specimens removed along the weld bead, for review of
all of the tensile properties of the weld metal.
Charpy-V impact tests were performed at temperatures
of 2 60, 2 40, 2 20, 0 and 208C, both in as-welded
condition and after heat treatment, in order to evaluate the
safety of the variation of toughness for the use of the
consumable. Tests were performed on specimens accord-
ing to ASTM standard A-370 [21], in the dimensions of

Table 2. Results of mechanical properties obtained for weld metals in the research programme [17 – 20].

Weld metal Chemical composition Condition LR (MPa) Ecv (2 208C)

1 C – 0.08, Si – 0.23, Mn – 2.43, Mo – 0.49, Ni – 2.11, Cr – 0.29 CS 881 50.5
TTPS 871 57.7
2 C – 0.07, Si – 0.19, Mn – 1.79, Mo – 0.35, Ni – 2.74, Cr – 0.35 CS 816 78.7
TTPS 812 88.5
3 C – 0.048, Si – 0.16, Mn – 1.46, Mo – 0.73, Ni – 3.00, Cr – 0.52 CS 804 64.5
TTPS 794 71.0
4 C – 0.040, Si – 0.16, Mn – 2.16, Mo – 0.54, Ni – 2.95, Cr – 0.31 CS 847 61.6
TTPS 854 61.3
5 C – 0.05, Si – 0.11, Mn – 1.14, Mo – 0.54, Ni – 2.76, Cr – 0.36 CS 781 79.2
TTPS 862 49.7
6 C – 0.074, Si – 0.44, Mn – 1.41, Mo – 0.45, Ni – 2.03, Cr – 0.83 CS 942 78.7
TTPS 941 48.5
7 C – 0.06, Si – 0.28, Mn – 1.98, Mo – 0.41, Ni – 2.66, Cr – 0.44 CS 967 84.8
TTPS 984 74.0
8 C – 0.05, Si – 0.14, Mn – 1.90, Mo – 0.39, Ni – 2.97, Cr – 0.26 CS 888 33.5
TTPS 844 67.2
Minimum R4 [3] Base metal – 860 50.0
Minimum R4 [3] Weld metal – 860 36.0

Notes: CS, as-welded; TTPS, post-welding heat treatment; Ecv, Charpy-V energy; LR, tensile strength limit.

Table 3. Chemical composition of consumable used (% by weight).

Element (% weight) C Si P S Mn Mo Ni Cr Cu V
Percentage of weight 0.06 0.24 0.007 0.008 1.89 0.58 2.95 0.46 0.02 0.02
 Welding International 523

22° 3.2 Tensile test

Table 6 shows the results of tensile tests performed on the
weld metals, in which the following key features are noted:

13 (a) all property values of the tensile test performed above

19
the minimum requirement for R4 grade steel;
(b) both the yield strength and the endurance limit
showed a decrease of approximately 10% due to the
25.4 9.5 increase of preheating;
(c) the TTPS did not cause changes in the mechanical
Figure 1. Details of the welding joint geometry used. properties.
Dimensions in mm.

3.3 Charpy-V impact test

Table 4. Welding parameters used.
Table 7 and Figure 3 show the results of the impact tests
Number of performed on the weld metals, in which the following key
Ø (mm) Current (A) Voltage (V) AT (kJ/mm) passes features are noted:
4.0 185– 195 23 – 28 1.80 18
(a) the impact toughness values showed little variation
Notes: Ø, diameter of the electrode; AT, heat input. for different analysis conditions;
(b) all values exceeded the minimum requirement for R4
grade steel;
15 16 17 18 (c) the transition curves show that it was possible to
11 13 14 12 obtain values of impact toughness that exceed the
8 10 9
5 7 6 minimum required for R4 steel throughout the
4 3
2 1 temperature range evaluated, both in the as-welded
condition and after TTPS.
Figure 2. Sequence of deposition of welding passes.

10 mm £ 10 mm £ 55 mm, and removed cross sectionally 3.4 Vickers hardness test

to the weld bead, 2 mm from the surface of the joint. The
notch was positioned on the thick surface and in the centre
of the weld bead.
Vickers hardness tests were performed by applying a
load of 10 kgf on specimens cross-sectional to the weld
bead, and a scan was performed of the surface hardness to
the root of the weld metal.
2.5 Metallographic tests
Metallographic tests were performed by scanning electron
microscopy (SEM) on the weld metals for evaluation of
microstructures.
The preparation for the analysis was a conventional
procedure of sanding and polishing, followed by a
chemical attack with 2% nital reagent.
Figure 4 shows the results of the Vickers hardness tests
(profile) performed on the weld metals. These values
correspond to the result of an indentation by position,
where the following key features are noted:
(a) the greatest hardness values were observed in the
region near the surface of the weld metals, where
values of the order of 350 HV10 were found;
(b) moving away from the surface, lower hardness values
were observed in all conditions;
(c) the weld metal M200 led to greater hardness values of
the weld metal M250, both in the as-welded condition
and after TTPS and
(d) the TTPS promoted a decrease in hardness,
particularly in the region near the surface of the
weld metals.

3. Results 3.5 Metallographic tests

3.1 Chemical analysis Figures 5 and 6 show the micrographs of the weld
Table 5 shows the chemical composition of the metals metals obtained for the different conditions, as observed
deposited, where levels of Mn and Ni, and the high carbon by SEM (MEV), where the following characteristics are
equivalent, are highlighted. noted:

Table 5. Chemical composition of metals deposited (% weight).

Element C Si P S Mn Mo Ni Cr Cu V Ceqa
Percentage of weight 0.065 0.282 0.0105 , 0.008 1.978 0.412 2.661 0.435 0.010 0.025 0.748
a
Ceq ¼ C þ Mn/6 þ (Cr þ Mo þ V)/5 þ (Cu þ Ni)/15 [22].
524 J.C.J. Ferreira et al.

(a) In the columnar region (RC) of the last pass (‘Top the results were all above the level of 860 MPa. This is an
Bead’ (TB)), the predominance of martensitic extremely important fact, as, as discussed in the literature
microstructure is noted for both conditions and [10,11], obtaining high structural robustness values for the
(b) From the cut-out region of the Charpy-V specimens, consumables with greater resistance has been the greatest
it was found that the microstructure consists of focus of concern. Indeed, Surian and coworkers [11,23,24]
tempered martensite and bainite, with predominance emphasize that in some cases, it is important to control heat
of the latter constituent both in the RC as in the input in order to obtain the required strength, which was
reheated region (RR) in all conditions of analysis. also observed by Jorge et al. [17]. In the previous studies
conducted [17 –20], it was found that this parameter is a
critical point to overcome, as shown in Table 2. Note that in
this table, the yield strength was always below or very near
4. Discussion
the lower limit of 860 MPa, not providing conditions for
4.1 Mechanical properties safe behaviour of consumables used when considering
Table 6 shows the structural robustness results for the normal variations that may occur as a result of a different
different analysis conditions strength, which shows that race of the same consumable, changes of welder, welding
position or change of base metal [10].
Table 6. Results of tensile tests of the weld metal. According to Ramirez [10] and Surian et al. [11], one
way to get an estimate of the structural robustness of the
Weld LE LR Al RA
high-strength weld metal is by controlling the carbon
metal Condition (MPa) (MPa) (%) (%)
equivalent of the weld metal. However, this statement
M200 CS 875 967 21.4 62.9 should be regarded only from a qualitative point of view
TTPS 892 984 21.4 61.5 when working with high and extra high-strength weld
M250 CS 796 892 21.1 63.2
TTPS 772 900 22.3 63.2
metals, given the high degree of dispersion of results
Minimum 580 860 12.0 50.0 that the various weld metals can generate, depending on
R4 [3] the interactive effect of different alloy elements acting
on high-strength weld metals, which are still not fully
Notes: CS, as welded; TTPS, post-welding heat treatment. understood. Indeed, Figure 7 shows a compilation of
results from several authors [8,10,11,18– 20], where it
appears that the dispersion of results is enhanced for higher
Table 7. Results of impact tests at 2208C (J).
values of carbon equivalent, which prevents a reliable
First Second Third extrapolation of results based on other experimental
Weld metal Condition test test test Mean results.
M200 CS 97.0 95.0 86.0 92.7
This high degree of dispersion may be associated with
TTPS 84.0 85.0 98.0 89.0 significant microstructural changes. In fact, according to
M250 CS 90.5 89.5 107.5 95.8 Ramirez [25], for carbon equivalent values greater than
TTPS 99.0 93.5 101.0 97.8 0.47, low-temperature transformation products begin to
Minimum Base metal 50.0 predominate, including martensite. Moreover, Lord and
R4 [3]
Minimum Weld metal 36.0
Jennings [8] state that for the normal range of welding
R4 [3] cooling speeds, there is not sufficient temperability to form
only martensite, and the microstructure of the high-
Notes: CS, as-welded; TTPS, post-welding heat treatment. strength weld metal is a mixture of martensite and bainite.

140 CS 140 CS
TTPS TTPS
120 120
Absorbed energy (joules)

Absorbed energy (joules)

100 100

80 80

60 60

40 40
Minimum for R4 Weld Metal = 36 J Minimum for R4 Weld Metal = 36 J
20 20

0 0
–60 –40 –20 0 20 –60 –40 –20 0 20
Test Temperature (°C) Test Temperature (°C)
M200 M250

Figure 3. Variation of the energy absorbed from the weld metals with the test temperature.
 Welding International 525

400 400
CS CS
380 TTPS 380 TTPS

Vickers Hardness (HV10)

Vickers Hardness (HV10)

360 360

340 340

320 320

300 300

280 280

260 260

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Distance from the Surface (mm) Distance from the Surface (mm)
M200 M250

Figure 4. Results of Vickers hardness tests (HV10).

Yet Svensson [9] states that weld metals with yield ferrite, martensite and bainite, and depending on the
strength higher than 690 MPa have a microstructure percentage of each of these constituents, there will be a
consisting of acicular ferrite, martensite and bainite. change in the mechanical properties of the weld metal.
Concurring with these arguments, Karlsson et al. [12] Therefore, in this range of chemical composition, it is not
report that the microstructures of high-strength weld surprising that the cooling rate has a strong influence on
metals containing from 2% to 3% Ni consist of acicular mechanical properties.

As-welded TTPS

TB

B
RC

RR

Figure 5. Microstructural aspect of M200 weld metal observed by MEV. Attack: 2% nital.
526 J.C.J. Ferreira et al.

As-welded TTPS

TB
M

RC

RR

Figure 6. Microstructural aspect of M250 weld metal observed by MEV. Attack: 2% nital.

All of this evidence reinforces the need to seek a
consumable that facilitates a weld metal with tensile
properties superior to those found in Table 2, so that all
these variations are considered when qualifying a welding
procedure. Thus, the weld metal that meets these
characteristics is precisely the one used in this study, as
1200
1100
Structural Robustness (MPa)
weld metal number 6, which also showed interesting
behaviour from the point of view of endurance limit, did
not have the same behaviour of impact toughness after the
post-weld heat treatment.
In this respect, it is important to mention that some
publications [8,12,14] using consumables with basic
chemical composition (C – 0.05, Mn – 2.0, Si – 0.30, Cr
– 0.40, Mo – 0.60, Ni – 3.0) similar to this study have shown
that the properties are maintained within the same level,
regardless of welding conditions. In fact, Table 8 shows a

summary of the results from these studies [8,12,14], where it

1000
is shown that mechanical strength had very little variation for
900
the various experimental conditions (only 8%), the most
significant change being in yield strength; however, at levels
800 greater than the requirements for R4 steel. From the results
shown in Table 8, it should also be noted that the values of
700 energy absorbed in the impact test have high levels, even for
the temperature of 2408C.
600
The results obtained in this study appear to be
500 consistent with data from the literature [8,12,14], both for
0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 structural robustness and impact toughness.
Carbon Equivalent (%) Regarding impact resistance, it is observed that the
Figure 7. Relationship between mechanical strength and the values obtained are uniform (Table 7), which can be
equivalent carbon content for the weld metals obtained by several attributed to the existing microstructure. Indeed, obser-
authors [8,10,11,18– 20]. vation of the microstructures of the columnar and RRs for
 Welding International 527

Table 8. Mechanical properties obtained with the welding consumable similar to that of this study, for various experimental conditions
[8,12,14].

Weld number 1 [12] 2 [12] 3 [12] 4 [12] 5 [12] 6 [12] 7 [12] 8 [12] 9 [8] 10 [14]
Temperature interpass (8C) 125 150 200 200 200 125 200 250 250 250
AT (kJ/mm) 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.3 1.8 1.7 1.7 1.0 1.4
LE (MPa) 978 885 922 885 844 939 858 734 872 756
LR (MPa) 994 942 953 929 938 972 931 924 922 945
Ecv (þ208C) 86 101 94 105 104 84 87 88 102 80
Ecv ( – 408C) 74 87 77 64 78 77 74 50 79 50

Note: Ecv, Charpy-V energy.

both preheatings (Figures 5 and 6) permit inference by the
uniformity of these same regions. The major difference
observed in the microstructure is precisely in the RC in
the last pass (TB), which, however, does not contribute to
impact resistance, as it is not part of the Charpy-V
specimen.
This same evidence is also noted in the results of the
Vickers hardness tests (Figure 4), where a drop in hardness
of the region near the surface for the rest of the welded
joint is observed, with stabilization of this property for the
remainder of the thickness.
4.2 Effect of post-weld heat treatment
There are many studies on high-strength welding metal, as
previously mentioned, which are important reviews on the
effect of chemical composition on microstructure and
mechanical properties. Yet there are few publications
available on the effect of post-weld heat treatments on
these weld metals. Publications that address this issue are
normally studying the effect of a particular element [26 –
33], excluding compositions rich in various alloying
elements, and hence the synergistic effect between these
elements. Other studies [34 – 36] that address this type of
composition do not involve weld metals with structural
robustness of the order of 860 MPa, as studied in this case.
Thus, this paper aims to contribute in this regard to
conduct an analysis of the effect of TTPS on the
mechanical properties of extra high-strength weld metal,
mainly because the previous results have registered the
complex effect of this procedure on these properties.
Most studies involving the effect of TTPS on
mechanical strength [6,17 – 20,26 – 40] report a drop of
case, and in most cases, the value of occurrence was
approximately 1% variation.
In the specific case of the weld metal in the study
(Table 6), the differences were similar to this, also in the
order of 1% for both cases. It should also be pointed out
that, of equal importance, for studies involving the
variation of heat treatment time on structural robustness
[18], significant variations were not observed (Figure 8).
In this figure, it is noted that the biggest difference in
structural robustness is due to the difference in preheating,
confirming the discussion of the previous item.
Implementation of post-weld heat treatments tends to
produce microstructural changes that affect toughness, in
some cases improving it and in other cases weakening it,
this effect being highly dependent on the chemical
composition and microstructure of the weld metal in the
as-welded condition.
The microstructural analysis conducted by electron
microscopy (Figures 5 and 6) highlighted the predominant
occurrence of martensitic microstructure in the region of
the last pass, and bainite in the region at the tip of the
Charpy-V notch, with similar morphology for both weld
metals.
This microstructural evidence is important because it
shows that the occurrence of similar microstructure is the
reason that the toughness of the weld metal is the same for
all experimental conditions used in this study.
As with the results of structural robustness (Figure 8),
a similar behaviour was observed for impact toughness in
1200
Resistance Limit (MPa)

this property with the execution of TTPS. However, it should

be noted that in the case of extra high-strength weld metals, 1000
M200
there is a tendency for the difference to be increasingly
smaller [18–20], which is probably associated with the fact M250
that the microstructure of the RR has the same microstructure R4 minimum
of the RC, which interferes with the percentage composition 800
of the strength of the specimen used for the tensile testing
representative of qualification of the weld metal [9,25]. This
was also verified for the weld metals of the studies performed,
because Table 2 shows the small difference in structural 600
0 1 2 3
robustness for the different results obtained between the as-
Treatment time (h)
welded and TTPS conditions. Indeed, observation of the
results presented in Table 2 allows the inference that the Figure 8. Effect of TTPS time on the structural robustness of
largest difference observed was of the order of 10% in one the weld metal [18].
528
140
120
Energy absorbed (Joules)
100
80
60
40
Minimum for R4 weld metal
20
0
0 1 2 3
Treatment time (h)
Figure 9. Effect of TTPS time on the mechanical strength/
structural robustness of the weld metal [18].
regard to variation in heat treatment time, as shown in
Figure 9, showing not only an important uniformity of the
results but also proximity of values for the experimental
conditions used.
4.3 Additional considerations
The results presented in this study aimed to consolidate
a series of experimental evidence involving the study of
high-strength weld metals for welding R4 grade steel [3],
which presents challenging requirements of strength and
impact toughness of 860 MPa and 50 J at 2 208C,
respectively.
As already mentioned, in this case, the need to perform
post-weld heat treatment to relieve residual stresses,
mandatory for the projects in question, increases the
difficulty of achieving the desired properties.
Although other authors have presented studies with
similar chemical composition [8,12,14], it was observed
that the effect of TTPS on the properties of the weld metal
was not evaluated in any of these studies, which was the
focus of this study. In this respect, it is important to
emphasize that there are very few publications addressing
the effect of TTPS on this type of weld metal, which made
a more detailed analysis by SEM necessary, to try to
permit better understanding of the behaviour of the
mechanical properties, and fill this lack of availability of
technical literature on the subject.
The results obtained in this study have provided
conditions for an adequate knowledge of the weld metal
under study and, most importantly, its recommendation for
welding R4 grade steel, as, from the point of view of
strength and impact toughness, results were obtained that
exceed the minimum required for use. Furthermore, it was
also possible to verify that even with significant variations
in experimental conditions, which according to the
literature [8,10,11] is extremely complex for maintenance
of properties, the behaviour of the R4 steel hardly changed,
which is one more positive factor for its recommendation.
The major difference in properties, of the order of
10% found on the yield and strength limits, was due to
J.C.J. Ferreira et al.
preheating, confirming the results of the previous studies
[17,20].
Based on all the evidence presented, particularly
considering the results of the tensile tests, the weld metal
under study can be used in welding R4 grade steels [3],
M250 using preheating to 2008C and post-weld heat treatment at
M200 6008C for 2 h.
5. Conclusions
Based on what was shown in the course of this study, it can
be concluded that:
(a) the weld metal studied was suitable for use in welding
R4 grade steel of the IACS standard W22;
(b) all results of mechanical strength/structural robust-
ness and impact toughness were higher than the
minimum required for the R4 grade steel of IACS
standard W22;
(c) the impact toughness showed better results than those
required, even for temperatures of 2 608C;
(d) the post-weld heat treatment did not cause changes in
the impact toughness of the weld metal under study.
Acknowledgements
The authors thank the following institutions for their support in
the execution of this study: A Fluke Engenharia Ltda., CEFET/
RJ, PUC-Rio, ESAB, CNPq and FINEP.
Notes
1. Email: sergio.faragasso@gmail.com
2. Email: lfgs59@gmail.com
3. Email: bott@puc-rio.br
References
1. Paiva AMC. Anchoring systems integrity: contributions to
analysis methodologies [master’s degree thesis]. CEFET/RJ,
Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2000. p. 125.
2. American Bureau of Shipping. Guide for certification of
offshore mooring chain. Section 3. Accessories. American
Bureau of Shipping; 1999.
3. International Association of Classification Societies. Off-
shore mooring chain, W22. International Association of
Classification Societies; 2011.
4. American Welding Society. Specification for low alloy steel
electrodes for shielded metal arc welding, AWS 5.5.
American Welding Society; 1996.
5. Military Standards. Electrodes, welding, mineral covered,
iron-powder, low hydrogen medium and high tensile steel, as
welded or stress-relieved weld application, MIL 22200-1F.
Military Standards; 1981.
6. Jorge JCF, et al. Development of repair procedure by
welding steel cables for anchoring petroleum platforms. Part
II. Ratification of procedure. Proceedings of the 28th
National Welding Congress; 2002; São Paulo; 2002.
p. 1 –10.
7. Jorge JCF, et al. Evaluation of the mechanical properties on
welded links of high strength steel mooring chains after
fatigue testing. Congresso Nacional de Soldagem, 378; 2008;
São Paulo, Anais; 2008. p. 1 – 10.
 Welding International
8. Lord M, Jennings G. Effect of interpass temperature on
properties of high-strength weld metals. Svetsaren. 1999;
54(1– 2):53 –58.
9. Svensson LE. Consumables for welding high strength steels.
Svetsaren. 1999;54(1– 2):29– 33.
10. Ramirez JE. Examining the mechanical properties of high-
strength steel weld metals. Weld J. 2009;88(1):32 – 38.
11. Surian ES, et al. SMAW, FCAW and SAW high-strength
ferritic deposits: the challenge is tensile properties. Weld J.
2010;89(3):54 –64.
12. Karlsson L, Keehan E, Andren HO, Bhadeshia HKDH.
Development of high strength steel weld metals – potential
of novel high-Ni compositions. Proceedings of the EUR-
OJOIN, 58; 2004; Vienna; 2004. p. 1 – 8.
13. Svensson LE. Microstructure and properties of high strength
weld metals. Mater Sci Forum. 2007;539 – 543:3937 – 3942.
14. Keehan E, Karlsoon L, Andren HO. Influence of C, Mn and
Ni contents on microstructure and properties of strong steel
weld metals. Part I. Effect of nickel content. Sci Technol
Weld Join. 2006;11(1):1 – 8.
15. Keehan E, Karlsoon L, Andren HO. Influence of C, Mn and
Ni ontents on microstructure and properties of strong steel
weld metals. Part II. Impact toughness gain from manganese
reductions. Sci Technol Weld Join. 2006;11(1):9 – 18.
16. Keehan E, Karlsoon L, Andren HO. Influence of C, Mn and
Ni contents on microstructure and properties of strong steel
weld metals. Part III. Increased strength from carbon
additions. Sci Technol Weld Join. 2006;11(1):19 – 24.
17. Jorge JCF, Souza LFG, Santos Filho OR, Santos Filho AM,
Bott IS. Influence of chemical compound and post-weld heat
treatment on mechanical properties and microstructure of
high-strength weld metals. Proceedings of the 33rd National
Congress on Welding; 2011; São Paulo; 2007. p. 1 – 10.
18. Faragasso SM, Souza LFG, Bott IS, Jorge JCF. Evaluation of
mechanical properties and microstructures of extra high-
strength steel weld metal for use in mooring equipment.
Proceedings of the 37th National Congress on Welding;
2011; São Paulo; 2011. p. 1– 10.
19. Jorge JCF, Souza LFG, Santos Filho OR, Bott IS. Study of
extra high-strength steel weld metals for use on petroleum
platform anchoring components. Part I. Mechanical proper-
ties. Proceedings of the 37th National Congress on Welding;
2011; São Paulo; 2011. p. 1– 10.
20. Gomes AJM, Jorge JCF, Souza LFG, Bott IS. Comparative
study on extra high-strength steel weld metals for use on
components of petroleum platform anchoring lines. Proceed-
ings of the 67th International Congress of ABM; 2012; Rio
de Janeiro; 2012. p. 806– 818.
21. ASTM International. Standard test methods and definitions
for mechanical testing of steel products, ASTM A-370-07a.
ASTM International; 2005.
22. American Bureau of Shipping. Rules for materials and
welding. Part 2. American Bureau of Shipping; 2012.
23. Vercesi J, Surian ES. The effect of welding parameters on
high-strength SMAW all-weld-metal. Part 1. AWS
E11018M. Weld J. 1996;75(6):191-s– 196-s.
24. Vercesi J, Surian ES. The effect of welding parameters on
high-strength SMAW all-weld-metal. Part 2. AWS
E10018M and E12018M. Weld J. 1997;77(4):164-s – 171-s.
529
25. Ramirez JE. Characterization of high strength steel weld
metals, chemical composition, microstructure and non-
metallic inclusions. Weld J. 2008;87(3):65s – 75s.
26. Evans GM. The effect of nickel on the microstructure and
proprieties of C –Mn all-weld metal deposits. Weld Res
Abroad. 1991;27(2/3):70– 83.
27. Evans GM. Development of MMA electrodes for offshore
application. Metal Constr. 1983;15(7):438 – 443.
28. Surian ES, Trotti J, Cassanelli A, de Vedia LA. Influence of
chromium element on mechanical properties and micro-
structure of weld metal from a high strength SMA electrode.
Weld J. 1994;73(3):45s – 53s.
29. Jorge JCF, Rebello JMA, Souza LFG. The effect of chromium
on the microstructure/toughness relationship of C–Mn weld
metal deposits. Mater Charact. 2001;47(3/4):195–205.
30. Evans GM. The effect of chromium on the microstructure
and properties of C– Mn all-weld metal deposits. Weld Res
Abroad. 1991;27(2/3):56– 69.
31. Surian ES, Trotti J, Cassanellii AN, de Vedia L. Influence of
Mn content on mechanical properties and microstructure of a
high strength SMA electrode weld metal. Proceedings of the
IIW Intermediate Meeting, IIW Doc. II-A; 1987; Rio de
Janeiro; 1987. p. 724– 787.
32. Surian ES, Trotti J, Herrera R, de Vedia LA. Influence of C
on mechanical properties and microstructure of weld metal
from a high-strength SMA electrode. Weld J. 1991;70(6):
133-s– 140-s.
33. Surian ES, Rissone MR, de Vedia LA. Influence of
molybdenum on ferritic high-strength SMAW all-weld-
metal properties. Weld J. 2005;84(4):53s– 62s.
34. Salvador LS, Jorge JCF, Bott IS. Effect of chemical
composition and heat treatment for alleviation of stresses in
properties of high-strength weld metal for application on
offshore structures. Proceedings of the 21st National Meeting
on Welding Technology; 1995; São Paulo; 1995. p. 1351.
35. Jorge JCF, Rebello JMA. Influence of welding procedure on
the microstructure and toughness of high strength ferritic
steel weld metals. Revue Soudure. 2000;56(1):4 –12.
36. Salvador LSF, Jorge JCF. Evaluation of consumables for
welding completion risers. Proceedings of the 2nd Latin
American Symposium on Pipes and Pressure Vessels; 1994;
Gramado, Rio Grande do Sul; 1994. p. 315– 324.
37. Mosciaro HB, Jorge JCF. Mechanical properties of repair by
welding high-strength cast steel. Proceedings of the 21st
National Meeting on Welding Technology; 1995; Caxias do
Sul; 1995. p. 1 –10.
38. Trindade VB, Paranhos RPR, Payão JC, Souza LFG.
Influence of the addition of nickel on the toughness of weld
metals of C– MN steels before and after stress relief heat
treatment. Soldagem Inspec ão. 2005;10(4):164 –171.
39. Vieira LA. Evaluation of toughness after stress relief heat
treatment in welds produced with rutile flux-cored wires that
contain nickel [master’s degree]. School of Engineering,
Federal University of Minas Gerais, Minas Gerais, Brazil; 2006.
40. Vogas PVBD, Jorge JCF, Souza LFG, Bott IS. Effect of post-
welding heat treatment on high-strength weld metal proper-
ties obtained by flux-cored wires. Proceedings of the 67th
International Congress of ABM; 2012; Rio de Janeiro; 2012.
p. 374– 387.