Advertisement

Effects of the Welding Process and Consumables on the Fracture Behavior of 9 Wt.% Nickel Steel

  • B.E. Kim
  • J.Y. Park
  • J.S. Lee
  • J.I. Lee
  • M.H. KimEmail author
Article

Abstract

In recent years, stringent environmental regulations for air pollution have led to increased demand for liquefied natural gas (LNG). Therefore, the demand for the design and construction of LNG-fueled vessels has also increased. One of the most important points for the design of LNG-fueled vessels is the structural integrity of the LNG fuel tank, particularly at cryogenic temperatures. Low temperature materials are used in the construction of LNG fuel tanks to ensure structural safety. Among the various low temperature materials, nickel steel is commonly employed for the design of LNG storage tanks. In addition, Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) and Submerged Arc Welding (SAW) are commonly applied to the construction of LNG storage tanks. On the other hand, the application of Flux Cored Arc Welding (FCAW) for nickel steel as an alternative to SMAW and SAW appears to be necessary, considering the high productivity. Nevertheless, there have been few studies of the fracture behavior of nickel steel with FACW compared to SMAW and SAW processes. This study examined the fracture characteristics of 9% nickel steel and weldments considering application for the LNG storage tanks. The fracture characteristics of FCAW was compared with SMAW at 25°C and − 163°C temperatures. As the result, the mechanical properties with FCAW were higher than those with SMAW at 25°C and − 163°C. In addition, SMAW is slightly better than FCAW in terms of the impact absorbed energy. Moreover, the crack tip opening displacement (CTOD) values of the weld metal and heat affected zone (HAZ) with FCAW were higher than those with SMAW.

Keywords

9% nickel steel Mechanical properties Crack tip opening displacement (CTOD) Charpy-V notch impact test 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) grant funded by the Korea government(MSIT) through GCRC-SOP (No. 2011-0030013). Moreover, this research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (NRF-2017R1D1A1B03035811).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Azzara A, Rutherford D, Wang H (2014) Feasibility of IMO annex VI tier III implementation using selective catalytic reduction. The ICCT 4:1–9Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    LR global technology center (2016) IMO marine environment protection committee seventieth session (MEPC 70) summary report. In: Lloyd’s registerGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    DNVGL Maritime (2016) ‘GLOBAL SULPHUR CAP 2020 - know the different choices and challenges for on-time compliance.’ DNVGLGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Oh DJ, Lee JM, Noh BJ, Kim WS, Ando R, Matsumoto T, Kim MH (2015) Investigation of fatigue performance of low temperature alloys for liquefied natural gas storage tanks. J Mech Eng SciGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Park WS, Chun MS, Han MS, Kim MH, Lee JM (2011) Comparative study on mechanical behavior of low temperature application materials for ships and offshore structures: part I—experimental investigations. Mater Sci Eng A 528:5790–5803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhao DS, Liu YJ, Wang XD, Ji ZS (2015) The calculation and measurement of welding residual stress for invar steel of a liquefied natural gas Carrier’s containment system. J Ship Prod Des 31(1):43–48Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Park JY, Kim MH (2016) Fatigue crack propagation characteristics of 3.5 to 9 WT. % nickel steels for low temperature applications. In: Proceedings of ASME 2016 35th international conference on ocean and Arctic engineeringGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jang JI, Ju JB, Lee BW, Kwon DI, Kim WS (2003) Effects of microstructural change on fracture characteristics in coarse-grained heat-affected zones of QLT-processed 9% Ni steel. Mater Sci Eng A 340:68–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kubo T, Ohmori A, Tanigawa O (1999) Properties of high toughness 9% Ni heavy section steel plate and its application to 200,000 kl LNG storage tanks. Kawasaki steel technical report, No.40Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yoon YK, Kim JH, Shim KT (2012) Mechanical characteristics of 9% Ni steel welded joint for LNG storage tank at cryogenic. ‎Int J Mod Phys: Conference Series 6:355–360Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Saitoh N, Yamaba R, Muraoka H, Saeki O (1993) Development of heavy 9% nickel steel plates with superior low-temperature toughness for LNG storage tanks. Nippon Steel Technical Report, No.58Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nippes EF, Balaguer JP (1986) A study of the weld heat-affected zone toughness of 9% nickel steel. Welding Research SupplementGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Khodir S, Shibayanagi T, Takahashi M, Abdel-Aleem H, Ikeuchi K (2014) Microstructural evolution and mechanical properties of high strength 3–9% Ni-steel alloys weld metals produced by electron beam welding. Mater Des:391–400Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dadgar Asl Y, Mostafa NB, V Panahizadeh R, Seyedkashi SMH (2011) Prediction of weld penetration in FCAW of HSLA steel using artificial neural networks. AIP Conf Proc 1315:884Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rajkumar GB, Murugan N (2014) Development of regression models and optimization of FCAW process parameter of 2205 duplex stainless steel. Indian J Eng Mater Sci 21:149–154Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mohamat SA, Ibrahim IA, Amir A, Ghalib A (2012) The effect of flux Core arc welding (FCAW) processes on different parameters. Procedia Eng 41:1497–1501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Katherasan D, Elias JV, Sathiya P, Noorul Haq A (2012) Flux cored arc welding parameter optimization using particle swarm optimization algorithm. Procedia Eng 38:3913–3926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    E-8 ASME (2013) Standard test methods for tension testing of metallic materials. American Society for Testing and MaterialsGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    E23 ASME (2013) Standard test methods for notched Bar impact testing of metallic materials. American Society for Testing and MaterialsGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    DNVGL Maritime (2017) ‘Rules for classification - part 2 materials and welding’Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    12135 ISO (2002) Metallic materials – unified method of test for the determination of quasistatic fracture toughness. ’ International Organization for StandardizationGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    15653 ISO (2002) Metallic materials – unified method of test for the determination of quasistatic fracture toughness of welds. ’ International Organization for StandardizationGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kim I, Lee MJ, Choi YS, Kang NH (2018) Effects of Mo content on low-angle Misorientation microstructure and mechanical properties of YS 550 MPa-grade steels for offshore structures. Steel Res Int 89:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shin SY, Hwang BC, Lee SH, Kim NJ, Ahn SS (2007) Correlation of microstructure and charpy impact properties in API X70 and X80 line-pipe steels. Mater Sci Eng A 458:281–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    BV Maritime (2017) ‘Rules on materials and welding for the classification of marine units’Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    DNVGL Maritime (2015) ‘Fabrication and testing of offshore structures’Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • B.E. Kim
    • 1
  • J.Y. Park
    • 1
  • J.S. Lee
    • 2
  • J.I. Lee
    • 3
  • M.H. Kim
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Naval Architecture and Ocean EngineeringPusan National UniversityBusanRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Hanjin Heavy Industries & Construction CO., Ltd.BusanRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.POSCOPohangRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations