Investigation of Hydrogen Embrittlement Susceptibility of X80 Weld Joints by Thermal Simulation

  • Huangtao Peng
  • Teng An
  • Shuqi Zheng
  • Bingwei Luo
  • Siyu Wang
  • Shuai Zhang


The objective of this study was to investigate the hydrogen embrittlement (HE) susceptibility and influence mechanism of X80 weld joints. Slow strain rate testing (SSRT) under in situ H-charging, combined with microstructure and fracture analysis, was performed on the base metal (BM), weld metal (WM), thermally simulated fine-grained heat-affected zone (FGHAZ) and coarse-grained heat-affected zone (CGHAZ). Results showed that the WM and simulated HAZ had a greater degree of high local strain distribution than the BM; compared to the CGHAZ, the FGHAZ had lower microhardness and more uniformly distributed stress. SSRT results showed that the weld joint was highly sensitive to HE; the HE index decreased in the following sequence: FGHAZ, WM, CGHAZ and BM. The effect of the microstructure on HE was mainly reflected in microstructure, local stress distribution and microhardness.


hydrogen embrittlement thermal simulation weld joints X80 



This work was financially supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51671215).


  1. 1.
    A.J. Slifka, E.S. Drexler, N.E. Nanninga, Y.S. Levy, J.D. McColskey, R.L. Amaro, and A.E. Stevenson, Fatigue Crack Growth of Two Pipeline Steels in a Pressurized Hydrogen Environment, Corros. Sci., 2014, 78, p 313–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    K. Shen, L. Xu, Y. Guo, J. Shi, and M. Wang, Effect of Microstructure on Hydrogen Diffusion and Notch Tensile Strength of Large Steel Forging, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2015, 628, p 149–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    X.F. Li, Y.F. Wang, P. Zhang, B. Li, X.L. Song, and J. Chen, Effect of Pre-Strain on Hydrogen Embrittlement of High Strength Steels, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2014, 616, p 116–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    X. Zhu, W. Li, T.Y. Hsu, S. Zhou, L. Wang, and X. Jin, Improved Resistance to Hydrogen Embrittlement in a High-Strength Steel by Quenching–Partitioning–Tempering Treatment, Scripta Mater., 2015, 97, p 21–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    V. Olden, A. Alvaro, and O.M. Akselsen, Hydrogen Diffusion and Hydrogen Influenced Critical Stress Intensity in an API, X70 Pipeline Steel Welded Joint- Experiments and FE Simulations, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2012, 37, p 1147–1148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. Zrilic, V. Grabulov, Z. Burzic, M. Arsic, and S. Sedmak, Static and Impact Crack Properties of a High-Strength Steel Welded Joint, Int. J. Press. Vessels Pip., 2007, 84, p 139–150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    I.A. Bataev, A.A. Bataev, V.G. Burov, Y.S. Lizunkova, and E.E. Zakharevich, Structure of Widmanstatten Crystals of Ferrite and Cementite, ISSN 0967-0912, Steel Trans., 2008, 38, p 684–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Y.D. Han, H.Y. Jing, and L.Y. Xu, Welding Heat Input Effect on the Hydrogen Permeation in the X80 Steel Welded Joints, Mater. Chem. Phys., 2007, 84, p 139–150Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    L.W. Wang, Z.Y. Liu, Z.Y. Cui, C.W. Du, X.H. Wang, and X.G. Li, In Situ Corrosion Characterization of Simulated Weld Heat Affected Zone on API, X80 Pipeline Steel, Corros. Sci., 2014, 85, p 401–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. Lin, N. Ma, Y. Lei, and H. Murakawa, Measurement of Residual Stress in Arc Welded Lap Joints by cosα X-ray Diffraction Method, J. Mater. Process. Technol., 2017, 243, p 387–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    H.B. Xue and Y.F. Cheng, Hydrogen Permeation and Electrochemical Corrosion Behavior of the X80 Pipeline Steel Weld, J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 2013, 22, p 170–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    W.M. Zhao, T.M. Zhang, Y.J. Zhao, J.B. Sun, and Y. Wang, Hydrogen Permeation and Embrittlement Susceptibility of X80 Welded Joint Under High-Pressure Coal Gas Environment, Corros. Sci., 2016, 111, p 84–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    J.M. Pardal, S.S.M. Tavares, B.A.R.S. Barbosa, F.B. Mainier, J.S. Corte, and J.P. Pardal, Investigation of Hydrogen Embrittlement Failure in a Steam Separator by Field Metallography, Eng. Fail. Anal., 2013, 35, p 46–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    C.D. Beachem, A new Model for Hydrogen-Assisted Cracking, Metall. Trans., 1972, 3, p 437–451Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A.R. Troiano, The Role of Hydrogen and Other Interstitials in the Mechanical Behavior of Metals, Trans. ASM, 1960, 52, p 54–80Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. Zapffe and C. Sims, Hydrogen Embrittlement, Internal Stress and Defects in Steel, Trans. ASM, 1941, 145, p 225–271Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    F. Mohammadi, F.F. Eliyan, and A. Alfantazi, Corrosion of Simulated Weld HAZ of API, X80 Pipeline Steel, Corros. Sci., 2012, 63, p 323–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    H. Aydin and T.W. Nelson, Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of Hard Zone in Friction Stir Welded X80 Pipeline Steel Relative To Different Heat Input, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2013, 586, p 313–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    S.P. Trasatti, E. Sivieri, and F. Mazza, Susceptibility of a X80 Steel to Hydrogen Embrittlement, Mater. Corros., 2005, 56, p 111–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    W.G. Zhao, W. Wang, S.H. Chen, and J.B. Qu, Effect of Simulated Welding Thermal Cycle on Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of X90 Pipeline Steel, Mater. Sci. Eng. A., 2011, 528, p 7417–7422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    E. Fallahmohammadi, F. Bolzoni, G. Fumagalli, G. Re, G. Benassi, and L. Lazzari, Hydrogen Diffusion into Three Metallurgical Microstructures of a CeMn X65 and Low Alloy F22 Sour Service Steel Pipelines, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2014, 39, p 13300–13313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    X.F. Li, J. Zhang, Y.F. Wang, M.M. Ma, S. Shen, and X.L. Song, The Dual Role of Shot Peening in Hydrogen-Assisted Cracking of PSB1080 High Strength Steel, Mater. Des., 2016, 110, p 602–615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    C.R.F. Azevedo, Failure Analysis of a Crude Oil Pipeline, Eng. Fail. Anal., 2007, 14, p 978–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    K.W. Andrews, Empirical Formulae for the Calculation of Some Transformation Temperatures, J Iron Steel Inst., 1965, 203, p 721–727Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    W. Zhao, Y. Zou, K.J. Matsuda, and Z.D. Zou, Corrosion Behavior of Reheated CGHAZ of X80 Pipeline Steel in H2S-Containing Environments, Mater. Des., 2016, 99, p 44–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    T. An, H.T. Peng, P.P. Bai, S.Q. Zheng, X.L. Wen, and L. Zhang, Influence of Hydrogen Pressure on Fatigue Properties of X80 Pipeline Steel, J. Hydrogen Energy, 2017, 42, p 15669–15678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    X.Y. Zhang, H.L. Gao, and Z.Y. Bi, Effect of Welding Thermal Cycle to Microstructure and Properties of X80 Welded Steels, J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2009, 17, p 159–163Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    T.M. Zhang, W.M. Zhao, Q.S. Deng, W. Jiang, Y.L. Wang, Y. Wang, and W.C. Jiang, Effect of Microstructure Inhomogeneity on Hydrogen Embrittlement Susceptibility of X80 Welding HAZ Under Pressurized Gaseous Hydrogen, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2017, 42, p 25102–25113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    N.E. Nanninga, Y.S. Levy, E.S. Drexler, R.T. Condon, A.E. Stevenson, and A.J. Slifka, Comparison of Hydrogen Embrittlement in Three Pipeline Steels in High Pressure Gaseous Hydrogen Environments, Corros. Sci., 2012, 59, p 1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    W.Y. Chu, L.J. Qiao, J.X. Li, Y.J. Su, Y. Yan, Y. Bai et al., Hydrogen Embrittlement and Stress Corrosion Cracking, Science Press, Beijing, 2013Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    I. Moro, L. Briottet, P. Lemoine, E. Andrieu, C. Blanc, and G. Odemer, Hydrogen Embrittlement Susceptibility of a High Strength Steel X80, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2010, 527, p 7252–7260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    I. Maroef, D.L. Olson, M. Eberhart, and G.R. Edwards, Hydrogen Trapping in Ferritic Steel Weld Metal, Int. Mater. Rev., 2013, 47, p 191–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    None, Hydrogen embrittlement and stress corrosion cracking, Brit. Corros. J., 2013, 20, p 158–158Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    R. Kirchheim, Revisiting Hydrogen Embrittlement Models and Hydrogen-Induced Homogeneous Nucleation of Dislocations, Scripta Mater., 2010, 62, p 67–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    G.T. Park, S.U. Koh, H.G. Jung, and K.Y. Kim, Effect of Microstructure on the Hydrogen Trapping Efficiency and Hydrogen Induced Cracking of Linepipe Steel, Corros. Sci., 2008, 50, p 1865–1871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    M.C. Zhao, Y.Y. Shan, F.R. Xiao, K. Yang, and Y.H. Li, Investigation on the H2S- Resistant Behaviors of Acicular Ferrite and Ultrafine Ferrite, Mater. Lett., 2002, 57, p 141–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    T.Y. Jin, Z.Y. Liu, and Y.F. Cheng, Effect of Non-Metallic Inclusions on Hydrogen-Induced Cracking of API5L X100 Steel, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2010, 35, p 8014–8021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    K. Takasawa, R. Ikeda, N. Ishikawa, and R. Ishigaki, Effects of Grain Size and Dislocation Density on the Susceptibility to High-Pressure Hydrogen Environment Embrittlement of High-Strength Low-Alloy Steels, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 2012, 37, p 2669–2675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    H.Y. Liou, R.I. Shieh, F.I. Wei, and S.C. Wang, Roles of Microalloying Elements in Hydrogen Induced Cracking Resistant Property of HSLA Steels, Corrosion, 1993, 49, p 389–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    D. Hardie, E.A. Charles, and A.H. Lopez, Hydrogen Embrittlement of High Strength Pipeline Steels, Corros. Sci., 2006, 48, p 4378–4385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    F. Huang, J. Liu, Z.J. Deng, J.H. Cheng, Z.H. Lu, and X.G. Li, Effect of Microstructure and Inclusions on Hydrogen Induced Cracking Susceptibility and Hydrogen Trapping Efficiency of X120 Pipeline Steel, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2010, 527, p 6997–7001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Z.Y. Liu, X.G. Li, C.W. Du, G.L. Zhai, and Y.F. Cheng, Stress Corrosion Cracking Behavior of X70 Pipe Steel in an Acidic Soil Environment, Corros. Sci., 2008, 50, p 2251–2257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    C.Y. Yan, C.Y. Liu, and Y. Bo, 3D Modeling of the Hydrogen Distribution in X80 Pipeline Steel Welded Joints, Comp. Mater. Sci., 2014, 83, p 158–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    X. Zhou and J. Song, Effect of Local Stress on Hydrogen Segregation at Grain Boundaries in Metals, Mater. Lett., 2017, 196, p 123–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    A. Takahashi and H. Ogawa, Influence of Microhardness and Inclusion on Stress Oriented Hydrogen Induced Cracking of Line Pipe Steels, Trans. Iron Steel Inst., 1996, 36, p 334–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    W.K. Kim, H.G. Jung, G.T. Park, S.U. Koh, and K.Y. Kim, Relationship between Hydrogen-Induced Cracking and type I, Sulfide Stress Cracking of High-Strength Linepipe Steel, Scripta Mater., 2010, 62, p 195–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ASM International 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Huangtao Peng
    • 1
  • Teng An
    • 1
  • Shuqi Zheng
    • 1
    • 2
  • Bingwei Luo
    • 1
  • Siyu Wang
    • 1
  • Shuai Zhang
    • 1
  1. 1.State Key Laboratory of Heavy Oil Processing and Department of Materials Science and EngineeringChina University of PetroleumBeijingChina
  2. 2.Beijing Key Laboratory of Failure, Corrosion and Protection of Oil/Gas Facility MaterialsChina University of PetroleumBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations