Next Article in Journal
Assessment of Digital Image Correlation Effectiveness and Quality in Determination of Surface Strains of Hybrid Steel/Composite Structures
Previous Article in Journal
Multiscale Simulation of Laser-Based Direct Energy Deposition (DED-LB/M) Using Powder Feedstock for Surface Repair of Aluminum Alloy
Previous Article in Special Issue
Investigation of Microstructure and Mechanical Properties of High-Depth-to-Width-Ratio Horizontal NG-GMAW Joint for S500Q Steel
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Materials
Volume 17
Issue 14
10.3390/ma17143560
materials-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Research on the Influence of HMFI and PWHT Treatments on the Properties and Stress States of MAG-Welded S690QL Steel Joints

by
Jacek Górka
1,* and
Mateusz Przybyła
2
1
Department of Welding Engineering, Silesian University of Technology, Konarskiego Str. 18a, 44-100 Gliwice, Poland
2
FAMET S.A., Szkolna Str. 15, 47-225 Kędzierzyn Koźle, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Materials 2024, 17(14), 3560; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17143560
Submission received: 10 June 2024 / Revised: 1 July 2024 / Accepted: 10 July 2024 / Published: 18 July 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in the Welding of Materials)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of the HFMI (high-frequency mechanical impact) treatment of each weld bead on the properties of a butt joint with a ceramic backing welded by robotic method 135 (MAG—metal active gas welding method) and to determine the effect of HMFI on the stress level. This analysis was based on a comparison of three butt joints made of a S690QL plate, in the as-welded condition, with the HFMI of each bead and with the heat treatment carried out with PWHT stress relief annealing. The high-frequency (90 Hz) peening of each weld bead was linked with a stress reduction in the weld via the implementation of compressive stresses into the joint. The HFMI pneumatic hammer was used for this. The correctness of treatment was achieved when 100% of the surface of each bead including the face was treated. As part of the post-welding tests, basic tests were carried out based on the standards for the qualification of welding technology, and as a supplementary test, a stress state analysis using the Barkhausen effect was carried out. The tests carried out showed that the use of high-frequency peening after each pass did not affect the negative results of all the required tests when qualifying the welding technology of S690QL sheet metal compared to the test plates in the as-welded condition and after heat treatment—stress relief annealing. Inter-pass peening of the welded face and HAZ (heat-affected zone) resulted in a reduction in post-weld residual stresses at a distance of 12 mm from the joint axis compared to the stress measurement result for the sample in the as-welded condition. This allowed for a positive assessment of peening in the context of reducing the notch, which is the concentration of tensile stresses in the area of the fusion line and HAZ. The tests carried out showed that the peening process does not reduce the strength properties of welded joints, and the results obtained allow the technology to be qualified based on applicable standards.

1. Introduction

The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of the HFMI treatment of each weld bead on the properties of a butt joint with a ceramic backing welded using a robotic method 135 (MAG) and to determine the effect of HMFI on the stress level and mechanical properties.
Welding techniques constitute the predominant discipline in global steel construction manufacturing. Concomitant with welding are the numerous technological challenges encountered by welding engineers on a daily basis [1]. Among these challenges, the main ones are the deformations and stresses that result from the welding processes; they are the phenomena induced by closely related and characteristic welding processes, encompassing phase transitions related to volume change, uneven and rapid heating and cooling, and alterations in properties such as Young’s modulus (E), yield strength (Re), or thermal expansion coefficient during heating and cooling [2,3,4,5]. The prevailing method employed to alleviate stresses and strains post-welding is heat treatment, notably stress relief annealing. This treatment utilizes electric or gas furnaces, or in localized applications, induction or resistance devices. Another method which can be implemented and is widely used is the optimization of welding parameters and sequences in order to reduce distortion [6]. An alternative to conventional post-weld heat treatments is hammer peening [7,8,9,10]. This method involves inter-pass peening or peening the face of welds, be they butt or fillet welds, to introduce compressive stresses through plastic deformations. The advantage of this method lies in its capability to facilitate both local and globally effective post-weld peening [11,12,13,14]. Peening can be executed through various systems and different conventional methods, such as electric or pneumatic impact weld dressing. Additionally, relatively recent methods of stress reduction by peening include “ultrasonic peening treatment” (UPT), “high-frequency impact treatment” (HiFIT), “ultrasonic peening” (UP), “pneumatic impact treatment” (PIT), and “ultrasonic needle peening” (UNP) [7,8]. These methods have primarily been developed to enhance impact efficiency, machining precision, and operator comfort by minimizing the impact on the operator [15,16,17,18,19]. European standards presently lack information regarding whether the use of high-frequency mechanical impact (HFMI) treatment is an essential variable in the welding process. Consequently, research is imperative to address key issues when qualifying metal arc welding technologies to meet the requirements of EN ISO 15614-1 and to examine the influence of HFMI on the results of the required tests [20]. Over the recent 70 years, the yield point of structural steel has surged by more than five times, commencing with low-alloy steel (Re about 200 MPa), progressing through higher-strength normalized low-alloy steel (Re about 350 MPa), steels produced with a thermo-mechanical treatment (Re up to 700 MPa), and culminating with quenched and tempered steels boasting a yield point of approximately 1300 MPa [21,22,23,24,25,26]. Fine-grained steels, as a classification, do not constitute a distinct group based on their production process, chemical composition, or mechanical properties. Rather, this designation pertains to steels characterized by a fine-grained microstructure in a condition set for delivery—a feature advantageous due to low grain growth in the heat-affected zone during the welding process [27,28,29,30]. Fine-grained steels are produced using normalizing, thermo-mechanical treatment, and quenching with tempering. The mechanical properties of fine-grained steels depend on both their chemical composition and the production process [31,32,33,34,35]. The primary challenge during the welding of quenched and tempered fine-grained steels is cold cracking. To optimize the strength and cracking resistance of a welded joint, it is imperative for the strength of the filler metal to be either equal to or slightly lower than the base material. The use of a filler metal with higher strength is not recommended. Welds should be strategically positioned in areas of construction with minimal stresses to mitigate the risks of cracking [36,37,38,39]. Currently, the hammering process has not been considered as one of the technological factors when qualifying welding technology. The tests carried out showed that the hammering process does not reduce the strength properties of the joints, and the results obtained allowed the technology to be qualified based on the applicable standards. Such knowledge is used in practice and allows in some cases to reduce the cost of heat treatment, especially in the case of repaired joints. The novelty of this research is based on a different approach compared to the well-known and already investigated fatigue strength improvement with high-frequency mechanical impact treatment. The direction of this research is based on the thesis that mechanical impact treatment can be considered as a partial replacement or complementary stress reduction method in terms of methods such as post-weld heat treatment, especially for materials where implementation of regular annealing has number of limitations such as S690QL. These limitations stem from the heat treatment state of delivery of quenched and tempered materials. Tempered steels in general can be subjected to stress annealing, adhering to the limits, which are in general 30–40 °C below the steel tempering temperature, which can cause a reduction in hardness and strength because it may temper the steel further, effectively softening it. If this limit is not adhered to, PWHT treatment carried out in a tempering range will result in a reduction in yield and tensile strength.
The aim of this article was to connect manufacturing approaches together with advanced and more detailed methodologies which can be implemented during the analysis of welding technology qualifications. Major research studies from a scientific point of view were focused on the determination of stress states while taking into the account that the method used (Barkhausen) could be implemented in heavy industry circumstances.

2. Materials and Methods

This analysis was based on a comparison of three butt joints made of S690QL plate (Table 1), in the as-welded condition, with the HFMI of each bead and with the heat treatment carried out via stress relief annealing. The consumable used for welding was Multimet brand solid IMT NiMoCr electrode wire with diameter Ø1.2 mm (Table 2).

2.1. Preparation of Welded Joints

As part of this work, 3 test plates were made of S690QL steel with dimensions of 10 × 150 × 600 mm. For each test plate, there were two plates with a 1/2 V beveled weld groove. These plates were mounted on a CLOOS robotic test bench together with a ceramic backing placed in the axis of the welded joint (Figure 1 and Figure 2).
The ceramic backing was utilized to ensure the accurate fusion and formation of the weld root on one side of the robotic bench. The welding procedure was executed on a CLOOS robotic workstation, guaranteeing uniform welding parameters across each of the test plates. These parameters encompassed arc voltage, welding current, number of stitches, welding speed, shielding gas composition (92% Ar + 8% CO2), and the stick-out distance from the welded element. The welding station operator meticulously recorded the welding parameters, and each plate underwent a three-layer welding process (refer to Table 3). The resultant outcomes of the average linear energy demonstrate that welding on the robotic workstation facilitated the attainment of consistent welding conditions concerning the linear energy of each bead.

2.2. High-Frequency Mechanical Impact

The high-frequency (90 Hz) peening of each weld bead was linked with stress reduction in the weld by implementation of compressive stresses into the joint. The Weld Line 10 pneumatic hammer from PITEC GmBH was used for this. The correctness of treatment was achieved when 100% of the surface of each bead including the face was treated (Figure 3). The HFMI was carried out manually (Figure 4).

2.3. Post-Weld Heat Treatment

The third of the test plates after welding was subjected to heat treatment, which is commonly used to reduce the stress and deformation caused by welding processes. The stress relief annealing process in an electric furnace was divided into three stages: controlled heating, annealing, and controlled cooling (Figure 5).

2.4. Methodology of Tests and Acceptance Criteria

As part of the post-welding tests basic tests were carried out based on the standards for the qualification of welding technology, and as a supplementary test, a stress state analysis using the Barkhausen effect was carried out.
Tests were conducted in accordance with the requirements of EN ISO 15614-1:2017. In accordance with the requirements of the specification and qualification of metal welding technology (Welding technology testing—Part 1), each test plate was subjected to non-destructive testing:
⮚
Visual test (VT) in accordance with EN ISO 17637 [40];
⮚
Penetration test (PT) in accordance with EN ISO 3452-1 [41];
⮚
Radiographic testing (RT) in accordance with EN ISO 17636-1 [42].
All nondestructive tests on the test plates were positive.
The next step was to make specimens for destructive testing in accordance with EN ISO 15614-1:2017:
⮚
Tensile test—2 pieces of specimens according to EN ISO 4136 [43];
⮚
Side and root bend test—4 pieces of samples in accordance with EN ISO 5173 [44];
⮚
Charpy test—2 sets of samples in accordance with EN ISO 9016 [45];
⮚
Vickers hardness test—2 lines of measurement in accordance with EN ISO 9015-1 [46];
⮚
Macroscopic test—1 piece in accordance with EN ISO 17639 [47].
Due to the thickness of the base material, the impact test specimens were reduced to a dimension of 7.5 × 10 × 55 mm (so-called reduced cross-section specimens). For the transverse bending test, two pieces of 40 mm wide face bend specimens and two 40 mm wide rim bend specimens were made. Acceptance criteria for individual tests are shown in Table 4.

Barkhausen Effect Measurement

The stress state was determined utilizing the MagStress5c (NNT Sp. z o.o. ul. Kartuska 432A, 80-125 Gdańsk, Poland) meter and a validated test procedure designed to ascertain this condition through the Barkhausen effect. This meter gauges the intensity of the Barkhausen effect by employing a standard probe (with a single core). The orientation of magnetization thereby dictates the orientation of the Barkhausen effect’s intensity examination. The recorded EB voltage signal is translated within the meter into an EB intensity descriptor, denoted as the INT parameter, serving as a quantification of the root mean square voltage of the EB voltage signal. Measurements of EB intensity, specifically the magnitude of INT, were conducted on the frontal aspect in the direction parallel to the weld axis (R direction) at various measurement points. These points were strategically positioned at the intersections of a grid formed by seven vertical and seven horizontal lines. The schematic representation of these points on the surface of the plate is illustrated in Figure 6. The initial horizontal line (designated as 0) aligned with the crest of the weld bead, while the vertical lines were sequentially numbered from 1 to 7, originating from the left edge of the weld. Stress measurements were calculated in three states: in the state after welding, after heat treatment (via stress relief annealing), and after peening.
The MagStress5c system autonomously translates the INT value into an epsilon (ε) strain through a calibration function table stored in its memory, represented as ε = FO(X). Here, X denotes the ratio of the measured INT intensity to the reference INT intensity value (INTref), assumed to signify the undeformed state (ε = 0). The meter logs both the INT value and the Si value, or stress (σ), calculated using the formula σ = E × ε, where E represents Young’s modulus. A constant value of E = 210 GPa is stored in the meter. In the current investigation, the adopted methodology involved the analytical computation of the ε strain value based on the recorded INT values within the gauge.

3. Results

The tests were performed in the destructive testing laboratory of FAMET Group S.A. in Kedzierzyn-Kozle. The laboratory was equipped with calibrated and verified equipment by accredited notified bodies in the field of destructive testing. Tests were completed with positive results for samples taken from the two welding test plates. Tensile test results were found negative for test plate samples taken from the PWHT specimen.

3.1. Destructive Tests Result Analysis

The results of destructive testing of welded joints are presented in Table 5, Table 6 and Table 7. The hardness measurement diagram is shown in Figure 7.
Transverse tensile test results for specimens taken from as-welded and HFMI-treated test plates met the requirements given and were within the acceptable limits. Results obtained from the post-weld heat-treated specimens taken from the test plate did not meet the requirements. The most probable reason for this is that the S690QL material was delivered in an as-tempered condition while exceeding 560 °C (PWHT was carried out at 580 °C—holding temperature). The result of initial tempering was altered so that the mechanical properties were negatively affected by the decrease in tensile and yield strength.
Face and root bend test results for all specimens were found within the acceptable limits, leading to the conclusion that welding, PWHT treatment, and HFMI treatment result in specimens having high plasticity, regardless of the technology used.
Impact tests results for all specimens were found to be within the acceptable limits. Results for the S690QL + PWHT heat-affected zones (average value 218.5 J) in comparison to the S690QL + HFMI (average value 68.1 J) zones displayed a higher value due to the lower values of hardness at both heat-affected zones, which were as follows: S690QL + PWHT (average value 206.6 HV10) and S690QL + HFMI (average value 270.6 HV10). Hardness test results for the S690QL + HFMI specimens showed that they displayed an increase in hardness in comparison with the post-weld heat-treated specimens: for HFMI, the average value was 301 HV10, while for PWHT, the average values was 270 HV10, signifying a 10.3% difference. Both the increase in hardness and the decrease in impact strength in the area subjected to HFMI were due to local intensive plastic deformations.
Macro specimens showed a compact and correct cross-section structure with the following zones being visible: parent materials, heat-affected zone, and weld. Macroscopic images revealed individual passes and boundaries between the primary segments of the welded joints. A fusion line was clearly visible, creating a boundary between the base material and heat-affected zone. For the specimen that was impacted mechanically at a high frequency, the treatment resulted in a concave transition between the weld face and the parent material. The concave transition in the weld toe area was subjected to additional measurements via a micro specimen visual examination after welding, and the HFMI treatment confirmed that the depth of the indentation was less than 0.5 mm, which qualifies this welding joint to at least of a quality level C (ISO 5817) [48]. The macro examination’s purpose was to detect potential inconsistencies (such as crack or pores); however, none were observed.
In addition to a regular examination required by EN ISO 15614-1:2017, a micro examination was carried out in order to define what occurs after HMFI treatment (Figure 8 and Figure 9).
Figure 8 and Figure 9 show that due to the HFMI treatment being carried out during and after welding, the surface of the weld was impacted by a local deformation at a depth of 0.03–0.04 mm. No other consequences of a similar type could be observed in the area of the welded joint. According to ref. [7], a depth value of up to 0.3 mm was registered, but the authors were not provided any evidence for this, such as a macro/micro examination.

3.2. Stress Measurement Using the Barkhausen Effect

All three specimens were measured with the same number of measurement points (topography is shown on Figure 10), and the results were presented in the form of a color map—successive measurement points along the Y weld axis are depicted as a function of stress in MPa on the X axis (Figure 11, Figure 12 and Figure 13). For each side, three series of measurements were taken, and the distances from the weld face axis were, respectively, 0, 12, 15, 20, 30, 40, and 50 mm. Table 8 shows the summary of the results obtained—given as an INT value directly after the MagStress5c measurements were taken. After the conversion of the INT parameter, stress values were measured in MPa, and they are presented in Table 9.
From the graph shown in Figure 13, it can be seen that as a result of the welding process, the stress level in the region of the fusion line (12 mm from the weld axis) was about +30 to +70 MPa for the post-weld and HFMI specimens and displayed tensile stress. For the PWHT-treated sample, its average value according to the the measurements was about −40 MPa, and it displayed compressive stress. At the measurement points located in and around the HAZ (15 mm from the weld axis), the stress for the post-weld sample was +5 MPa, while it was −65 MPa for the post-HFMI sample and −140 MPa for the PWHT sample. The results in these areas illustrate what changes occur as a result of welding processes and subsequent treatments, such as HFMI or the PWHT. To comprehensively characterize the impacts of the annealing procedure on the stress distribution concerning the distance from the weld axis (X), mean values derived from sigma (σ) values and corresponding standard deviations (∆σ) were computed for seven specific points situated along a designated line. These calculated values are presented in Table 10 below.
The type and state of residual stress in each of the controlled specimens allows us to summarize from the weld’s integrity and structural performance that there was a significant decrease observed in terms of properties such as tensile strength in the post-weld heat-treated welding joint. Table 10 confirms that a significant change in the joint’s stress state occurred. Based on the mechanical tests and Barkhausen stress measurements, it can be observed that for the as-welded joint, the stress level was higher in comparison to as-HFMI-treated one; nonetheless, both welding joints passed the mechanical tests. Based on the structural performance of the joints and on the other research studies analyzed, HFMI had a positive impact on cyclic loading and fatigue conditions.

4. Summary

The conducted tests lead to the following conclusions:
⮚
Based on this article, it was proven that a classic welding technology qualification can be carried out together with HFMI as it has no negative impact on the obtained results.
⮚
Tensile test results were positive for specimens taken from as-welded and HFMI-treated weld samples. For the PWHT-treated sample, the tensile test showed a value that decreased below the requirement. It showed that the PWHT of quenched and tempered construction steels has a negative impact on tensile strength. On the other hand, the results showed that HMFI did not reduce their mechanical properties.
⮚
Face and root bending tests showed no inconsistencies and met the acceptance criteria specified in the standards.
⮚
Charpy test results were within the range of acceptance criteria for all three samples. The HFMI sample displayed the lowest values in both the HAZ and weld area compared to as-welded and PWHT-treated samples.
⮚
Hardness measurements showed that using HMFI caused a hardness increase in the area that was treated. The reason for this is that a local high plastic deformation occurs due to hammer peening. Despite the increase in hardness in the HFMI sample, the values were still within the outlined limits.
⮚
The macroscopic examination showed no inconsistencies on the cross-sections of all three test plates.
⮚
The spatial distribution of the stress level specific to each treatment condition was revealed. The stress state in the HAZ zone was particularly interesting. The authors believe that the HAZ zone can be considered as being 12–15 mm away from weld axis (Figure 13).
⮚
The Barkhausen measurements showed that the HFMI treatment has a positive impact on the HAZ in comparison to as-welded sample but that the benefit is lower compared to regular PWHT. The PWHT conducted was slightly above the tempering temperature, and this is a reason why HFMI was less beneficial in comparison to annealing in terms of a reduction in residual stress.
⮚
Evidently, the high-frequency mechanical impact (HFMI) treatment markedly diminishes stress levels within welds. An analysis of the stress distribution plots presented in Figure 13, depicting as-welded and HFMI-treated states with respect to the distance on the X axis, further allows us to infer that for distances of X ≥ 15 mm, the impact of HFMI is virtually negligible.
⮚
The results indicate that a further investigation in terms of HFMI treatment with regard to a reduction in stress states is necessary and will be carried out by the authors in the future.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.G. and M.P.; methodology, J.G. and M.P.; formal analysis, J.G.; investigation, M.P. and J.G.; resources, M.P.; data curation, M.P. and J.G.; writing—original draft preparation, M.P.; writing—review and editing J.G.; visualization, J.G.; project administration, J.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available upon request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available because the authors do not wish to publish supplementary materials.

Conflicts of Interest

Author Mateusz Przybyła was employed by the company FAMET S.A. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

References

  1. Lefebvre, F.; Peyrac, C.; Elbel, G.; Revilla-Gomez, C.; Verdu, C.; Buffière, J.-Y. Understanding of fatigue strength improvement of steel structures by hammer peening treatment. Procedia Eng. 2015, 133, 454–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Gary, B.; Barsoum, Z. A guideline for fatigue strength improvement of high strength steel welded structures using high frequency mechanical impact treatment. Procedia Eng. 2013, 66, 98–107. [Google Scholar]
  3. Hobbacher, A. IIW Recommendations for Fatigue Design of Welded Joints and Components; WRC Bulletin 520; The Welding Research Council: New York, NY, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  4. Kanga, H.; Leeb, Y.; Sunb, X. Effects of residual stress and heat treatment on fatigue strength of weldments. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2008, 497, 37–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Górka, J.; Przybyla, M.; Szmul, M.; Chudzio, A.; Ladak, D. Orbital TIG welding of titanium tubes with perforated bottom made of titanium-clad steel. Adv. Mater. Sci. 2019, 19, 55–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Liu, S.; Wu, Z.; Liu, H.; Zhou, H.; Deng, K.; Wang, C.; Liu, L.; Li, E. Optimization of welding parameters on welding distortion and stress in S690 high-strength steel thin-plate structures. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2023, 25, 382–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Fuštar, B.; Lukačević, I.; Dujmović, D. High-Frequency mechanical impact treatment of welded joints. Građevinar 2020, 72, 421–436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Haagensen, P.J.; Maddox, S.J. Recommendations on Methods for Improving the Fatigue Strength of Welded Joints: IIW-2142-10; International Institute of Welding (IIW): Cambridge, UK; Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  9. Gerster, P.; Schäfers, F.; Leitner, M. Pneumatic Impact Treatment (PIT)—Application and Quality Assurance: IIW Document XIII-WG2-138-13; International Institute of Welding (IIW): Cambridge, UK; Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  10. Statnikov, E.S.; Shevtsov, U.M.; Kulikov, V.F. Ultrasonic impact tool for welds strengthening and reduction of residual stresses. Publ. Sci. Work. Metall. 1997, 92, 27–29. [Google Scholar]
  11. Harati, E.; Svensson, L.; Karlsson, L.; Hurtig, K. Effect of HFMI treatment procedure on weld toe geometry and fatigue properties of high strength steel welds. Procedia Struct. Integr. 2016, 2, 3483–3490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Abadie, F.X.; Beckmerhagen, P.; Belassel, M. Shot Peening: A Dynamic Application and Its Future, 3rd ed.; Metal Finishing News: Wetzikon, Switzerland, 2009; pp. 17–44. [Google Scholar]
  13. Bagheri, S.; Guagliano, M. Review of shot peening processes to obtain nanocrystalline surfaces in metal alloys. Surf. Eng. 2009, 25, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Bagherifard, S.; Guagliano, M. Fatigue behavior of a low alloy steel with nanostructured surface obtained by severe shot peening. Eng. Fract. Mech. 2012, 81, 56–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Trško, L.; Bokůvka, O.; Nový, F.; Guagliano, M. Effect of severe shot peening on ultra-high-cycle fatigue of a low-alloy steel. Mat. Des. 2014, 57, 103–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Bokůvka, O.; Nicoletto, G.; Guagliano, M.; Kunz, L.; Palcek, P.; Novy, F.; Chalupová, M. Fatigue of Materials at Low and High Frequency Loading, 2nd ed.; University of Zilina: Zilina, Slovakia, 2015; ISBN 978-80-554-0857-6. [Google Scholar]
  17. Noyan, I.C.; Cohen, J.B. Residual Stress-Measurement by Diffraction and Interpretation; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  18. Lago, J.; Trsko, L.; Jambor, M.; Nový, F.; Bokůvka, O.; Mičian, M.; Pastorek, F. Fatigue Life Improvement of the High Strength Steel Welded Joints by Ultrasonic Impact Peening. Metals 2019, 9, 619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Fitzpatrick, M.E.; Fry, A.T.; Holdway, P.; Kandil, F. Determination of Residual Stresses by X-ray Diffraction, 2nd ed.; National Physical Laboratory: Teddington, UK, 2005; pp. 42–48. [Google Scholar]
  20. ISO 15614-1:2017; Specification and Qualification of Welding Procedures for Metallic Materials—Welding Procedure Test—Part 1: Arc and Gas Welding of Steels and Arc Welding of Nickel and Nickel Alloys. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2017.
  21. Bhadeshia, H.K.D.H. Reliability of Weld Microstructure and Property Calculations. Weld. J. 2004, 83, 237–243. [Google Scholar]
  22. Hildebrand, J.; Werner, F. Change of structural condition of welded joints between high-strength fine-grained and structural steels. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2004, 2, 87–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Mikia, C.; Homma, K.; Tominaga, K. High strength and high performance steels and their use in bridge structures. J. Constr. Steel Res. 2002, 58, 3–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Saeglitz, M.; Krauss, G. Deformation, fracture, and mechanical properties of low temperature-tempered martensite in SAE 43xx steels. Metall. Mater. Trans. A 2017, 28, 377–387. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Graville, B.A. Cold Cracking in Welds in HSLA Steels, Welding of HSLA (Microalloyed) Structural Steels. In Proceedings of the AIM/ASM Conference, Rome, Italy, 9–12 November 1976; American Society of Metals: Novelty, OH, USA, 1976. [Google Scholar]
  26. Ramirez, J.E. Characterization of high-Strength Steel Weld Metals: Chemical Composition, Microstructure, and Nonmetalic Inclusions. Weld. J. 2008, 87, 65–75. [Google Scholar]
  27. Ollilainen, V.; Hurmola, H.; Pontinen, H. Mechanical properties and machinability of a high-strength, medium-carbon, microalloyed steel. J. Mater. Energy Syst. 1984, 5, 222–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Kasuya, T.; Hashiba, Y. Carbon Equivalent to Asses Hardenability of Steel and Prediction of HAZ Hardness Distribution; Nippon Steel Report, No. 95; Nippon Steel Corporation: Oita, Japan, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  29. Adamczyk, J. Manufacturing of mass-scale products from structural microalloyed steels in integrated production lines. J. Achiev. Mater. Manuf. Eng. 2007, 20, 16–21. [Google Scholar]
  30. Skowronska, B.; Szulc, J.; Bober, M.; Chmielewski, T. Selected properties of RAMOR 500 steel welded joints by hybrid PTA-MAG. J. Adv. Join. Process. 2022, 5, 100111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Tomków, J.; Landowski, M.; Fydrych, D.; Rogalski, G. Underwater wet welding of S1300 ultra-high strength steel. Mar. Struct. 2022, 81, 103120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Grajcar, A.; Różański, M.; Stano, S.; Kowalski, A. Microstructure characterization of laser-welded Nb-microalloyed silicon-aluminum TRIP steel. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2014, 23, 3400–3406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Żuk, M.; Górka, J.; Czupryński, A.; Adamiak, M. Properties and structure of the weld joints of quench and tempered 4330V steel. Metalurgija 2016, 55, 613–616. [Google Scholar]
  34. Fydrych, D.; Labanowski, J.; Rogalski, G. Weldability of high strength steels in wet welding conditions. Pol. Marit. Res. 2013, 20, 67–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Charleux, M.; Poole, W.; Militzer, M. Precipitation behavior and its effect on strengthening of an HSLA-Nb/Ti steel. Metall. Mater. Trans. A 2001, 32, 1635–1647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Górka, J. Analysis of simulated welding thermal cycles S700MC using a thermal imaging camera. Adv. Mater. Res. 2014, 1036, 111–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Maeda, K.; Suzuki, R.; Suga, T.; Kawahito, Y. Investigating delayed cracking behaviour in laser welds of high strength steel sheets using an X-ray transmission in-situ observation system. Sci. Technol. Weld. Joi. 2020, 25, 377–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Pan, Q.; Mizutani, M.; Kawahito, Y.; Katayama, S. High power disk laser-metal active gas arc hybrid welding of thick high tensile strength steel plates. J. Laser Appl. 2016, 28, 012004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Mician, M.; Harmaniak, D.; Novy, F.; Winczek, J.; Moravec, J.; Trško, L. Effect of the t8/5 Cooling Time on the Properties of S960MC Steel in the HAZ of Welded Joints Evaluated by Thermal Physical Simulation. Metals 2020, 10, 229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. ISO 17637:2016; Non-Destructive Testing of Welds—Visual Testing of Fusion-Welded Joints. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016.
  41. ISO 3452-1:2021; Non-Destructive Testing—Penetrant Testing. Part 1: General Principles. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021.
  42. ISO 17636-1:2022; Non-Destructive Testing of Welds—Radiographic Testing. Part 1: X- and Gamma-Ray Techniques with Film. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2022.
  43. ISO 4136:2022; Destructive Tests on Welds in Metallic Materials—Transverse Tensile Test. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2022.
  44. ISO 5173:2023; Destructive Tests on Welds in Metallic Materials—Bend Tests. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2023.
  45. ISO 9016:2022; Destructive Tests on Welds in Metallic Materials—Impact Tests—Test Specimen Location, Notch Orientation and Examination. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2022.
  46. ISO 9015-1:2001; Destructive Tests on Welds in Metallic Materials—Hardness Testing. Part 1: Hardness Test on Arc Welded Joints. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2001.
  47. ISO 17639:2022; Destructive Tests on Welds in Metallic Materials—Macroscopic and Microscopic Examination of Welds. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2022.
  48. ISO 5817:2023; Welding—Fusion-Welded Joints in Steel, Nickel, Titanium and Their Alloys (Beam Welding Excluded)—Quality Levels for Imperfections. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2023.
Materials 17 03560 g001
Figure 1. Weld joint preparation with ceramic backing.
Figure 1. Weld joint preparation with ceramic backing.
Materials 17 03560 g001
Materials 17 03560 g002
Figure 2. Test plate with ceramic backing on the welding robot bench.
Figure 2. Test plate with ceramic backing on the welding robot bench.
Materials 17 03560 g002
Materials 17 03560 g003
Figure 3. Welded bead surface after HMFI.
Figure 3. Welded bead surface after HMFI.
Materials 17 03560 g003
Materials 17 03560 g004
Figure 4. HFMI treatment of welding joint.
Figure 4. HFMI treatment of welding joint.
Materials 17 03560 g004
Materials 17 03560 g005
Figure 5. Post-weld heat treatment of S690QL test plate curve.
Figure 5. Post-weld heat treatment of S690QL test plate curve.
Materials 17 03560 g005
Materials 17 03560 g006
Figure 6. Location of measurement points in mm and test directions in relation to the welded joint.
Figure 6. Location of measurement points in mm and test directions in relation to the welded joint.
Materials 17 03560 g006
Materials 17 03560 g007
Figure 7. Location of the hardness test indentations in butt welds.
Figure 7. Location of the hardness test indentations in butt welds.
Materials 17 03560 g007
Materials 17 03560 g008
Figure 8. Microscopic examination of both sides of the weld in the HFMI area—magnification ×50.
Figure 8. Microscopic examination of both sides of the weld in the HFMI area—magnification ×50.
Materials 17 03560 g008
Materials 17 03560 g009
Figure 9. Microscopic examination of both sides of the weld in the HFMI area—magnification ×200.
Figure 9. Microscopic examination of both sides of the weld in the HFMI area—magnification ×200.
Materials 17 03560 g009
Materials 17 03560 g010
Figure 10. Stress distribution along the Y and X axes for the specimen after welding.
Figure 10. Stress distribution along the Y and X axes for the specimen after welding.
Materials 17 03560 g010
Materials 17 03560 g011
Figure 11. Stress distribution along the Y and X axes for the specimen after HFMI treatment.
Figure 11. Stress distribution along the Y and X axes for the specimen after HFMI treatment.
Materials 17 03560 g011
Materials 17 03560 g012
Figure 12. Stress distribution along the Y and X axes for the specimen treated with PWHT.
Figure 12. Stress distribution along the Y and X axes for the specimen treated with PWHT.
Materials 17 03560 g012
Materials 17 03560 g013
Figure 13. Summary comparing the measured stress values as a function of distance from the weld axis for all three test specimens: W—as-welded specimen; M—HFMI-treated specimen; and H, PWHT condition.
Figure 13. Summary comparing the measured stress values as a function of distance from the weld axis for all three test specimens: W—as-welded specimen; M—HFMI-treated specimen; and H, PWHT condition.
Materials 17 03560 g013
Table 1. Chemical composition of welded base material (plate) from Material Certificate 3.1.
Table 1. Chemical composition of welded base material (plate) from Material Certificate 3.1.
PlateElement Concentration, wt %
CMnSiPSCrMoNiVCuAlTiNbZr
S690QL0.1431.2620.2850.010.00060.2590.3020.8230.0040.0870.0280.0010.0230.001
Table 2. Chemical composition of IMT NiMoCr wire from Material Certificate 3.1.
Table 2. Chemical composition of IMT NiMoCr wire from Material Certificate 3.1.
WireElement Concentration, wt %
CMnSiPSCrNiVCuAlMoTi + Zr
IMT 0.0821.600.560.010.0060.3471.430.090.020.0020.270.002
Table 3. Welding parameters of test plates (L = 600 mm).
Table 3. Welding parameters of test plates (L = 600 mm).
Sample DesignationBead NoInter-Pass Temperature
[°C]		Average Welding Current
[A]		Average Arc Voltage
[V]		Welding Time
[min]		Linear Energy
[kJ/mm]
S690QL
As welded		128.319424.32:461.05
282.520027.81:360.71
3104.524726.52:311.32
S690QL
+ HMFI		134.019224.22:441.02
260.620227.41:370.72
3108.525026.42:291.31
S690QL
+ PWHT		136.019524.32:441.04
292.419927.31:380.71
3119.724926.52:331.35
Table 4. Acceptance criteria for all tests.
Table 4. Acceptance criteria for all tests.
Test TypeAcceptance Criteria [12]
Tensile testRm value should not be less than the corresponding required minimum value for the base material—Rm minimum 770 MPa
Bend testDuring the test, there should be no inconsistencies in the specimens above 3 mm in any direction—bending former radius 60 mm
Impact testImpact value shall be in accordance with the relevant standard of the base material—KV2 minimum 40 J at −20 °C
Hardness testFor non-heat-treated specimens—HV10 max. 450
For heat-treated (PWHT) specimens—HV10 max. 380
Macroscopic examinationNo nonconformities in quality levels lower than those described in Table 4 of EN ISO 15614-1:2017-08 [20]
Table 5. Test results for as-welded joints.
Table 5. Test results for as-welded joints.
Type of TestDesignationResultDesignationResult
Tensile testTT-1793 MPaTT-2791 MPa
Face bend testTFBB1positiveTFBB2positive
Root bend testTRBB1positiveTRBB2positive
Impact testVWT 0/2122.6 JVHT 0/273.6 J
VWT 0/2130.8 JVHT 0/285.0 J
VWT 0/2135.7 JVHT 0/262.1 J
Hardness testMa-1 HV10L1263268264195197234272271268207188234250261266
L2264261258201193225266265256216186199251261258
Macroscopic examinationMa-1Materials 17 03560 i001
Table 6. Test results for HMFI-treated welding joints.
Table 6. Test results for HMFI-treated welding joints.
Type of TestDesignationResultDesignationResult
Tensile testTT-1782 MPaTT-2780 MPa
Face bend testTFBB1positiveTFBB2positive
Root bend testTRBB1positiveTRBB2positive
Impact testVWT 0/285.0 JVHT 0/271.9 J
VWT 0/2114.5 JVHT 0/265.4 J
VWT 0/294.8 JVHT 0/267.0 J
Hardness testMa-1 HV10L1275267267268248311293298313310300267267271278
L2284285263236262250298287296272261262274278277
Macroscopic examinationMa-1Materials 17 03560 i002
Table 7. Test results for post-weld heat-treated welding joints.
Table 7. Test results for post-weld heat-treated welding joints.
Type of TestDesignationResultDesignationResult
Tensile testTT-1714 MPa (negative)TT-2714 MPa (negative)
Face bend testTFBB1positiveTFBB2positive
Root bend testTRBB1positiveTRBB2positive
Impact testVWT 0/2101.4 JVHT 0/2225.6 J
VWT 0/2114.5 JVHT 0/2228.9 J
VWT 0/285.0 JVHT 0/2201.1 J
Hardness testMa-1 HV10L1264268264195197234272271268207188238250261266
L2264261258201193225266265256216186199251261258
Macroscopic examinationMa-1Materials 17 03560 i003
Table 8. INT parameter values measured on all three test samples.
Table 8. INT parameter values measured on all three test samples.
As-Welded S690QL 0 mm12 mm15 mm20 mm30 mm40 mm50 mm
11967390624561769186117841810
21268485233402033194617741799
31388401035492327200819101859
41406498843352095211218961750
51362474139512089222918961810
61350420739872167229319261902
71464309436022356200718291742
HFMI-Treated S690QL0 mm12 mm15 mm20 mm30 mm40 mm50 mm
11497487618401864177417421906
21561567420571796177817561895
31568513619391575182318311731
41511503126011956169218781773
51372500326071918171417071774
61402501020831948196017951796
71447466321721939191217041697
S690QL + PWHT0 mm12 mm15 mm20 mm30 mm40 mm50 mm
11517227615101457163215361560
21276259415521558154415071499
31396261914781480155014521639
41457260215031369156314981499
51466261916671536152214581548
61318246516051636157815191464
71516224016381650164615391556
Table 9. Stress state values after conversion from INT into MPa on all three test samples.
Table 9. Stress state values after conversion from INT into MPa on all three test samples.
As-Welded S690QL 0 mm12 mm15 mm20 mm30 mm40 mm50 mm
1−8216−39−112−97−109−105
2−26156−3−74−85−111−107
3−211194−48−77−90−97
4−2056431−68−66−92−115
5−2215017−68−55−92−105
6−2262619−61−50−88−91
7−185−116−46−77−102−117
HFMI-Treated S690QL0 mm12 mm15 mm20 mm30 mm40 mm50 mm
1−17557−100−96−111−117−90
2−157124−72−107−110−114−92
3−15574−86−154−103−102−119
4−17167−31−84−127−94−111
5−21765−31−89−122−124−111
6−20665−69−85−83−107−107
7−19146−60−86−89−124−126
S690QL + PWHT0 mm12 mm15 mm20 mm30 mm40 mm50 mm
1−169−52−171−188−140−164−158
2−257−32−160−158−162−172−175
3−208−30−181−180−160−189−138
4−188−31−173−218−157−175−175
5−185−30−132−164−168−187−161
6−239−39−146−139−153−169−185
7−170−55−138−136−137−163−159
Table 10. Stress state values after conversion.
Table 10. Stress state values after conversion.
X [mm]As-Welded S690QLΔσ690QL + HFMIΔσ690QL + PWHTΔσ
0−19952−18222−20232
1231247123−3810
15521−6424−15717
20−6820−10023−16927
30−73−107−10715−15411
40−989−11210−17410
50−1059−10812−16414
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Górka, J.; Przybyła, M. Research on the Influence of HMFI and PWHT Treatments on the Properties and Stress States of MAG-Welded S690QL Steel Joints. Materials 2024, 17, 3560. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17143560

AMA Style

Górka J, Przybyła M. Research on the Influence of HMFI and PWHT Treatments on the Properties and Stress States of MAG-Welded S690QL Steel Joints. Materials. 2024; 17(14):3560. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17143560

Chicago/Turabian Style

Górka, Jacek, and Mateusz Przybyła. 2024. "Research on the Influence of HMFI and PWHT Treatments on the Properties and Stress States of MAG-Welded S690QL Steel Joints" Materials 17, no. 14: 3560. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17143560

APA Style

Górka, J., & Przybyła, M. (2024). Research on the Influence of HMFI and PWHT Treatments on the Properties and Stress States of MAG-Welded S690QL Steel Joints. Materials, 17(14), 3560. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17143560

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop