Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8r8nv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T08:43:25.117Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Characterization of microstructure and mechanical properties of continuous and pulsed current gas tungsten arc welded superaustenitic stainless steel

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2015

K. Devendranath Ramkumar*
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical & Building Sciences, VIT University, Vellore 632014, India
Ayush Choudhary
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical & Building Sciences, VIT University, Vellore 632014, India
Shivang Aggarwal
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical & Building Sciences, VIT University, Vellore 632014, India
Anubhav Srivastava
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical & Building Sciences, VIT University, Vellore 632014, India
Tadikonda Harsha Mohan
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical & Building Sciences, VIT University, Vellore 632014, India
N. Arivazhagan
Affiliation:
School of Mechanical & Building Sciences, VIT University, Vellore 632014, India
*
a) Address all correspondence to this author. e-mail: deva@vit.ac.in

Abstract

The present study investigates the joining of 5-mm-thick plates of superaustenitic stainless steel, AISI 904L by continuous current (CC) and pulsed current (PC) gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW) using ER2553 and ERNiCrMo-4 fillers. This research article attempts to provide a detailed structure–property relationship of these weldments. Interface microstructure revealed the absence of deleterious secondary phases at the heat affected zone in all the cases. Skeletal delta ferrite morphology at the cap of ER2553 fusion zone and multidirectional grain growth at the ERNiCrMo-4 fusion zone were observed for both the weldments. The average hardness at the fusion zone was found to be higher for PCGTA weldments using ER2553 due to the higher proportions of ferrite. Tensile studies corroborated that the failure occurred at the parent metal in all the cases. Charpy V-notch studies divulged that the CCGTA and PCGTA weldments utilizing ERNiCrMo-4 filler exhibited the greater impact toughness of 69 J and 75 J, respectively. The bend test results conveyed that both the CCGTA and PCGTA weldments using ERNiCrMo-4 exhibited soundness and ductility.

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2015 
Figure 0

TABLE I. Chemical composition of the base and filler metals.

Figure 1

TABLE II. Process parameters used.

Figure 2

FIG. 1. Macrophotographs of CCGTA and PCGTA weldments of AISI 904L.

Figure 3

FIG. 2. (a) Interface microstructure, (b) fusion zone microstructure at the root, and (c) fusion zone microstructure at the cap region of CCGTA weldments using filler.

Figure 4

FIG. 3. (a) Interface microstructure, (b) fusion zone microstructure at the cap, and (c) fusion zone microstructure at the root pass region of CCGTA weldments using ERNiCrMo-4 filler.

Figure 5

FIG. 4. (a) Line mapping analysis on the CCGTA weldment of AISI 904L using ER2553 filler. (b) SEM/EDAX point analysis on the CCGTA weldment of AISI 904L using ER2553 filler.

Figure 6

FIG. 5. (a) Line mapping analysis on the CCGTA weldment of AISI 904L using ERNiCrMo-4 filler. (b) SEM/EDAX point analysis on the CCGTA weldment of AISI 904L using ERNiCrMo-4 filler.

Figure 7

FIG. 6. (a) Interface microstructure, (b) fusion zone microstructure at the cap and (c) fusion zone microstructure at the root region of PCGTA weldments using ER2553 filler.

Figure 8

FIG. 7. (a) Interface microstructure, (b) fusion zone microstructure at the cap, and (c) fusion zone microstructure at the root region of PCGTA weldments using ERNiCrMo-4 filler.

Figure 9

FIG. 8. (a) Line mapping analysis on the PCGTA weldment of AISI 904L using ER2553 filler. (b) SEM/EDAX point analysis on the PCGTA weld zone of AISI 904L using ER2553 filler.

Figure 10

FIG. 9. (a) Line mapping analysis on the PCGTA weldment of AISI 904L using ERNiCrMo-4 filler. (b) SEM/EDAX point analysis on the PCGTA weld zone of AISI 904L using ERNiCrMo-4 filler.

Figure 11

FIG. 10. Hardness plot at the different passes of the CCGTA weldments.

Figure 12

TABLE III. Hardness data of CCGTA weldments of AISI 904L.

Figure 13

FIG. 11. Hardness plot at the different passes of the PCGTA weldments.

Figure 14

TABLE IV. Hardness data of PCGTA weldments of AISI 904L.

Figure 15

FIG. 12. Comparison of hardness at different passes of the weldments.

Figure 16

FIG. 13. Photographs of the fractured tensile samples obtained from CCGTAW using (a) ER2553 and (b) ERNiCrMo-4 filler.

Figure 17

TABLE V. Average tensile properties of AISI 904L weldments.

Figure 18

FIG. 14. SEM fractographs of the tensile tested CCGTA weldments of AISI 904L using (a) ER2553 and (b) ERNiCrMo-4.

Figure 19

FIG. 15. Photographs of the fractured tensile samples obtained from PCGTAW using (a) ER2553 and (b) ERNiCrMo-4 filler.

Figure 20

FIG. 16. SEM fractographs of the tensile tested PCGTA weldments of AISI 904L using (a) ER2553 and (b) ERNiCrMo-4.

Figure 21

TABLE VI. Impact test results of AISI 904L weldments.

Figure 22

FIG. 17. Impact tested CCGTA weldments using ER2553 filler showing (a) cap and (b) root locations, and ERNiCrMo-4 filler showing (c) cap and (d) root locations, respectively.

Figure 23

FIG. 18. SEM fractographs of impact tested CCGTA weldments using (a) ER2553 and (b) ERNiCrMo-4 filler, respectively.

Figure 24

FIG. 19. Impact tested PCGTA weldments using ER2553 filler showing (a) cap and (b) root locations, and ERNiCrMo-4 filler showing (c) cap and (d) root locations, respectively.

Figure 25

FIG. 20. SEM fractographs of impact tested PCGTA weldments using (a) ER2553 and (b) ERNiCrMo-4 filler, respectively.

Figure 26

FIG. 21. Photographs of the bend tested samples of AISI 904L welds.

Figure 27

TABLE VII. Bend test results.