4.7 Article

Comparative study of autogenous tungsten inert gas welding and tungsten arc welding with filler wire for dissimilar P91 and P92 steel weld joint

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.msea.2017.12.039

关键词

P91; P92; delta-ferrite; Tensile properties; Weldments; Charpy toughness

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology (DST) Govt. of India [SER-854-MID]
  2. Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
  3. BHEL Haridwar
  4. DST

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Creep strength enhanced ferritic/martensitic 9Cr-1Mo-V-Nb (P91) steel is also designated as ASTM A335 used for out-of-core and in-core (piping, cladding, ducts, wrappers, and pressure vessel) of Gen IV reactors. In present investigation, the dissimilar weld joint of P91 and P92 steel were made using the autogenous tungsten inert gas (TIG) welding with single pass, double side pass and multi-pass gas tungsten arc (GTA) welding with filler wire. Microstructure evolution in sub-zones and mechanical properties of dissimilar welded joints were studied in as welded and post weld heat treatment (PWHT) condition. Formation of delta-ferrite patches in weld fusion zone and heat affected zones (HAZs) and their influence on the mechanical behaviour of the welded joints were also studied. Presence of higher content of ferrite stabilizer in P92 steel have resulted the formation of delta-ferrite patches in weld fusion zone as well as HAZs. The delta-ferrite was observed in autogenous TIG welds joints. The delta-ferrite patches were formed in as-welded condition and remained in the microstructure after the PWHT. The delta-ferrite patches leads to reduction in Charpy toughness of autogenous TIG welds joint and also lower down the average hardness of weld fusion zone. Peak hardness and poor impact toughness were observed for autogenous TIG welds joint as compared to GTA welds. For microstructure characterization, field-emission scanning electron microscope (FESEM) with energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) and optical microscope were utilized.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据