You are on page 1of 8

IBP1651_11

COMPARISON BETWEEN SMAW AND GMAW-STT PLUS


FCAW-G WELDING OF API 5L X80 TUBES FOR PIPELINE
FABRICATION
1
Jaime Casanova Soeiro Jr. , David Bellentani Rocha 2, Antonio
Cordeiro Souza3, Srgio Duarte Brandi4
Copyright 2011, Brazilian Petroleum, Gas and Biofuels Institute - IBP
This Technical Paper was prepared for presentation at the Rio Pipeline Conference & Exposition 2011, held between September,
20-22, 2011, in Rio de Janeiro. This Technical Paper was selected for presentation by the Technical Committee of the event. The
material, as it is presented, does not necessarily represent Brazilian Petroleum, Gas and Biofuels Institute opinion or that of its
Members or Representatives. Authors consent to the publication of this Technical Paper in the Rio Pipeline Conference &
Exposition 2011.

Abstract
API 5L X80 steels are widely used in pipelines to transport oil and oil products under high pressure and where the
pipeline weight savings is important. The most common process in field for circumferential pipe-to-pipe welding is
shielded metal arc welding (SMAW), used in root, in the filling, and in finishing passes. It is a process used
successfully, but has the disadvantage of productivity and care for storage in the field. An alternative to productivity is
the process of gas metal arc welding (GMAW) with controlled transfer, such as the surface tension transfer (STT), for
welding of root passes and the filling and finished with flux cored arc welding (FCAW), which has high productivity and
quality comparable to welding with covered electrode.
In this work, two specimens of Brazilian API 5L X80 steel pipe were welded. One sample used one SMAW and the
other used GMAW-STT in the root pass and FCAW in the others passes. In SMAW were used in the root pass E6010
E9010-G filler metals with 3.25 mm in diameter, and all other passes with E9045 H4R-P2 consumable, with a diameter
of 4.0 mm. In GMAW-STT plus FCAW sample was welded with consumable ER80S-G, with 1.16 mm in diameter, in
the root pass and E101T1-GM-H8, with a diameter of 1.16 mm, for filling and finishing passes. In both cases were used
a argon-10% CO2 shielding gas. To compare the two welding the mechanical properties of the welds (hardness, tensile
strength, bending, nick-break and impact tests at 0oC) were compared, based on API 1104 standard.
The mechanical properties results showed that welding with controlled transfer and tubular electrode can be a good
substitute for welding with coated electrodes.

1. Introduction
High strength low alloy steels (HSLA) emerged in order to have superior mechanical properties when
compared to carbon steels [Bott,2005; Ratnapuli, 2008; Taiss, 2007]. HSLA steels have minimum yield strength from
275 MPa (40 Ksi) obtained by controlled rolling and heat treatments. They have low carbon and low amount of alloying
elements, which, in addition to specific thermo-mechanical processing routes, provided high mechanical strength and
good toughness [Ordoes, 2004; Bay, 2001]. HSLA steels are arranged in different grades on several standards,
according to their specific properties such as strength, toughness, plasticity, corrosion resistance and weldability [Bay,
2001]. One of its applications is for pipeline manufacturing for transporting oil and its products, such as gases, ruled by
API 5L and 1104 standards for material and for the welding of pipelines. In field, pipelines can be joined by different
welding processes [Wainer, 1992; Hillenbrand, 1997; Meyer, 1998; Rocha, 2010; Rocha, 2010a; Valim, 2005].
The GMAW-STT is a process variation on the usual GMAW, using shielding gases such as pure CO2, pure
argon or a mixture of both. GMAW-STT was designed to be applied to manufacture weld roots using a patented
technology called STT which means surface tension transfer [Waveform, 2006; Waveform, 2006a]. This GMAW
process variant was developed to generate low heat input, and small amount of fumes and spatters. To achieve these
objectives, the equipment operates with constant current curve, instead of constant voltage, which is typical for
conventional GMAW. Thus, the equipment can change the arc electrical current within a very short time. The welding
current wave shape is controlled to keep the arc opened and to transfer heat to weld pool. When the drop is formed at
the electrode tip, it will touch the weld pool, creating a short circuit. At this time, the equipment generates a drop in

______________________________

1
Engenheiro Mecnico, aluno do Curso de Especializao em Engenharia de Soldagem da Escola Politcnica da USP, aluno de Mestrado do
Departamento de Engenharia Metalrgica e de Materiais da EPUSP.
2
Mestre em Engenharia Metalrgica, Departamento de Engenharia Metalrgica e de Materiais da EPUSP Atualmente na Refinaria de Capuava
(RECAP) da Petrobrs, So Paulo.
3
Lincoln Electric do Brasil, Guarulhos, So Paulo.
4
Professor Associado, Departamento de Engenharia Metalrgica e de Materiais da EPUSP.

Rio Pipeline Conference & Exposition 2011


current, minimizing the pinch effect and, consequently, reduces the generation of fumes and spatters. Figure 1 presents a
schematic drawing of the current wave shape synchronized to the drop transfer.

Fig. 1 - GMAW-STT schematic current wave shape and the correspondent metal transfer type [Waveform, 2006a].
When compared to SMAW, GMAW-STT has advantages especially in relation to productivity, because there
is no need to stop production for supplies exchange and root pass grinding, because weld bead profile is flat. On the
other hand, the root bead profile made with a cellulosic electrode is convex, which leads to greater loss of time with the
root pass grinding operation [Waveform, 2006a].
The filling and finishing welding passes can be done by SMAW or FCAW process. The FCAW welding
process uses the same equipment as in GMAW process that generates a higher productivity, when compared to SMAW.
The advantages and disadvantages of each this process is a good subject to research.
The objective of this work is to compare mechanical properties of pipeline circumferential welded joint made
with SMAW and GMAW-STT/FCAW.

2. Experimental procedure
The API 5L X80 pipe in this experiment had a diameter of 20 inches and 19 mm thick. For the experiments,
four samples with 300 mm width were cut to form a weld joint. Table 1 shows the pipe chemical composition compared
to API 5L X80 standard classification.
Table 1 - Base metal chemical composition compared to API 5L X80 standard classification.
Elements
w%
API 5L

C
0,063
0.20

Mn
1,813
1,5

Si
0,159
-

P
0,019
0.025

S
0,005
0.015

Cr
0,015
-

Ni
0,014
-

Mo
0,207
-

Al
0,028
-

Ti
0,013

V
0,022

Nb
0,062

0.15

The SMAW welding were done with three electrodes types. It was utilized in the root pass two electrodes type,
E7018 in the first root pass and E9010 in the second root pass. The filling and finishing passes were done with an E9045
P2 H4R coated electrode [Lincoln, 2003], with 4 mm diameter, voltage of 28 V, welding current of 190 A, a welding
speed of 3.0 mm/s; and a preheating temperature of 150oC and interpass temperature of 200oC.
In the SMAW-STT/FCAW processes combinations, welding of root pass was made with the GMAW-STT
process using ER80S-G with pure CO2 as shielding gas. The wire diameter was 1.2 mm, a voltage of 19 V, welding
current of 55 (base current) and 400 A (peak current), welding speed of 8.3 mm/s and a gas flow of 14 l/min. The filler
2

Rio Pipeline Conference & Exposition 2011


and finishing welding passes were done with tubular electrode E101T1-GM-H8 [Lincoln, 2002] using a gas mixture of
75Ar-25CO2. The wire diameter was 1.2 mm; voltage of 23 V, welding current of 152 A, welding speed of 8.6 mm/s and
a shielding gas flow of 15 l/min. The tests used in this work were: lateral bending; tensile test, nick-break, impact test
and Vickers hardness. The acceptance criteria used were as specified in the API standard 1104.

3. Results and discussion


3.1. Tensile test
Results of tensile strength of each sector of the pipe are presented in figure 2 for both welding procedures. The
results showed almost no difference between SMAW and GMAW-STT/FCAW. Also, the results are according to API
5L standard (dashed lines)
900

700
600
500
400
300

706

668

706

693

707

692

100

712

200

695

Tensile Strength (MPa)

800

0
1

2
SMAW

GMAW-STT / FCAW

Figure 2: Tensile strength of each four sectors for both welding procedures.
3.2. Bending test
Results of bending tests for each sector of both procedures are presented in table 2. Besides the indications on
SMAW samples, all were according to acceptance criteria. All samples made with GMAW-STT presented results with
no indications of discontinuities. These results can be related to the process characteristics. In the case of SMAW, slag is
generated and the deposition is discontinuous compared to FCAW.
Table 2 - Base metal chemical composition compared to API 5L X80 standard classification.
Sector
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4

Specimen
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2

Process
SMAW
SMAW
SMAW
SMAW
SMAW
SMAW
SMAW
SMAW
GMAW-STT / FCAW
GMAW-STT / FCAW
GMAW-STT / FCAW
GMAW-STT / FCAW
GMAW-STT / FCAW
GMAW-STT / FCAW
GMAW-STT / FCAW
GMAW-STT / FCAW

Observed
No discontinuity.
1.1 mm of open in the fusion line
No discontinuity.
0.7 mm of open in the fusion line
1.2 mm of open in the fusion line
1.2 mm of open in the fusion line
No discontinuity.
No discontinuity.
No discontinuity.
No discontinuity.
No discontinuity.
No discontinuity.
No discontinuity.
No discontinuity.
No discontinuity.
No discontinuity.

Result
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved

Rio Pipeline Conference & Exposition 2011


3.3. Hardness test

Results of Vickers hardness test (HV5) are depicted in figure 3 for both welding procedures
and four sectors.
SMAW - Sector 1
Finishing

GMAW - STT/ FCAW - Sector 1

Filling

Root

Finishing

280
260
240
220
200
180

280
260
240
220
200

11

13

15

SMAW - Sector 2
Finishing

Filling

Root

10

13

Finishing

Filling

Root

300
Vickers Hardness (HV5)

Vickres Hardness (HV 5)

GMAW - STT/ FCAW - Sector 2

300
280
260
240
220
200
180

280
260
240
220
200
180

SMAW - Sector 3

Finishing

Filling

11

13

15

Root

10

13

GMAW - STT/ FCAW - Sector 3


Finishing

300

Filling

Root

300
Vickers Hardness (HV5)

Vickres Hardness (HV 5)

Root

180
1

280
260
240
220
200
180

280
260
240
220
200
180

11

13

15

SMAW - Sector 4
Finishing

10

13

GMAW - STT/ FCAW - Sector 4

Filling

Root

Finishing

300

Filling

Root

300
Vickers Hardness (HV5)

Vickres Hardness (HV 5)

Filling

300
Vickers Hardness (HV5)

Vickres Hardness (HV 5)

300

280
260
240
220
200
180

280
260
240
220
200
180

11

13

15

10

13

Figure 3: Hardness test for both welding procedures and four sectors. The hardness profiles
were measured in the root pass, filling pass and finishing pass.
Analyzing GMAW hardness results one can conclude the HAZ hardness presents a trend to
higher values than root and filling passes. This result is asymmetric regarding both sides HAZ. This
fact can be due to the coated electrode work angle, which is different from 90o. On the other hand,
4

Rio Pipeline Conference & Exposition 2011

GMAW-STT presented more uniform hardness values than SMAW, but he values for both
welding procedures are comparable, except SMAW finishing pass. It is important to notice the
difference in chemical composition in the fusion zone, due to different consumables used in each
welding procedure.
3.4. Chemical composition

Chemical compositions of weld metal in the root and face of weld joint in each position for
two welding procedures are presented in table 3.
Table 3 - Chemical compositions of weld metal in the root and face of weld joint in each position.
Process

Sector
1
2

SMAW
3
4
1

GMAWSTT /
FCAW

2
3
4

Specimen
Face
Root
Face
Root
Face
Root
Face
Root
Face
Root
Face
Root
Face
Root
Face
Root

C
0,053
0,084
0,056
0,078
0,053
0,087
0,064
0,100
0,044
0,060
0,044
0,063
0,044
0,073
0,043
0,064

Mn
1,244
1,180
1,237
1,256
1,231
1,196
1,237
1,093
2,111
1,864
2,144
1,826
2,145
1,789
2,142
1,790

Si
0,503
0,399
0,473
0,466
0,495
0,398
0,482
0,374
0,247
0,240
0,240
0,240
0,233
0,223
0,254
0,239

P
0,009
0,012
0,009
0,010
0,009
0,011
0,009
0,011
0,011
0,012
0,011
0,012
0,011
0,012
0,012
0,013

S
0,010
0,010
0,009
0,009
0,009
0,011
0,011
0,011
0,003
0,003
0,003
0,004
0,003
0,004
0,004
0,004

Cr
0,042
0,045
0,039
0,052
0,043
0,047
0,042
0,044
0,040
0,058
0,043
0,057
0,039
0,061
0,042
0,057

Ni
0,892
0,818
0,939
0,835
0,880
0,836
0,928
0,815
0,818
0,645
0,860
0,527
0,855
0,487
0,848
0,480

Mo
0,218
0,199
0,221
0,220
0,218
0,202
0,223
0,191
0,021
0,107
0,018
0,131
0,017
0,152
0,018
0,149

Al
0,002
0,002
0,002
0,004
0,003
0,003
0,002
0,002
0,804
0,643
0,712
0,557
0,697
0,473
0,794
0,630

Cu
0,022
0,019
0,023
0,020
0,022
0,018
0,023
0,017
0,010
0,032
0,010
0,039
0,008
0,040
0,009
0,050

Ti
0,012
0,013
0,012
0,016
0,012
0,015
0,012
0,014
0,003
0,003
0,002
0,003
0,002
0,003
0,003
0,003

V
0,012
0,010
0,012
0,011
0,012
0,010
0,011
0,009
0,003
0,006
0,002
0,006
0,002
0,006
0,003
0,007

Nb CEiiw (2)
0,006 0,376
0,007 0,387
0,005 0,381
0,009 0,401
0,006 0,373
0,007 0,395
0,005 0,389
0,004 0,386
0,017 0,464
0,022 0,450
0,015 0,472
0,020 0,444
0,015 0,471
0,019 0,450
0,016 0,470
0,020 0,440

Pcm (3)
0,166
0,187
0,168
0,190
0,165
0,192
0,177
0,197
0,176
0,184
0,178
0,185
0,177
0,194
0,177
0,185

Figure 4 depicts IIW carbon equivalent (CEiiw) and carbon equivalent parameter (Pcm) for
each position and welding procedure. The dashed lines represent CEiiw and Pcm of base metal,
respectively 0.413 and 0.175 .
0,386

0,389

0,373

0,395

CEiiw

0,401

0,381

0,387

0,376

0,3

0,197

0,177

0,192

0,165

0,168

0,1

0,190

0,2
0,187

(a)

0,4

0,166

Percentage (w%)

0,5

Pcm

0,0
Face

Root

Fa ce

Root

Fa ce

Root

Fa ce

Root
4

Sector / Specimen

CEiiw

Pcm

CEiiw

0,440

0,470

0,450

0,471

0,444

0,472

0,450

0,464

0,3

0,185

0,177

0,194

0,177

0,178

0,1

0,185

0,2
0,184

(b)

0,4

0,176

Percentage (w%)

0,5

Pcm

0,0
Face

Root
1

Face

Root

Face

Root
3

Face

Root
4

Sector / Specimen

CEiiw

Pcm

Figure 4: IIW carbon equivalent (CEiiw) and carbon equivalent parameter (Pcm) for each
position. (a) SMAW welding procedure and (b) GMAW-STT
/FCAW welding procedure.
5

Rio Pipeline Conference & Exposition 2011

Analyzing figure 4, SMAW presents CEiiw and Pcm lower than GMAW-STT/FCAW.
Comparing these results to hardness results there is no difference between welding sectors and
welding procedures. This result can be related to the effect of welding heat input of both welding
procedures.
3.5. Nick break test

Table 4 shows results of nick break for each welding sector and welding procedure;
Table 4 - Nick break test result for each welding sector and welding procedure.
Process

Sector

SMAW

GMAW-STT / FCAW

Problem

Result

No discontinuity. Approved

No discontinuity. Approved

No discontinuity. Approved

No discontinuity. Approved

No discontinuity. Approved

No discontinuity. Approved

No discontinuity. Approved

No discontinuity. Approved

Results presented no difference between welding sector and welding procedure.


3.6. Impact test

Results of Charpy V impact test at 0oC are presented in figure 5.

200

110
112

230
248

128
149

116
91

206
236

127
115

112
83

209
246

137
106

90
70

209
243

100

133
73

Absorbed energy 2 0oC (J)

300

Weld

Root

HAZ

Weld

Root

HAZ

Weld

Root

HAZ

Weld

Root

HAZ

0
1

3
SMAW

GMAW STT/ FCAW


1

Figure 5: IIW carbon equivalent (CEiiw) and carbon equivalent parameter (Pcm) for each
position. (a) SMAW welding procedure, and (b) GMAW-STT
/FCAW welding procedure.
Analyzing figure 5, root passes presented a lower absorbed energy than weld joint and HAZ.
Comparing both welding procedure, SMAW presented a higher absorbed energy than GMAWSTT/FCAW. The same trend is observed for weld metal. On the other hand, HAZ absorbed
6

Rio Pipeline Conference & Exposition 2011

energy was lower in HAZ for SMAW than GMAW-STT/FCAW. These results are related to weld
metal chemical composition and heat input. All results are higher than the specified by API 5L.

4. Conclusions
Based on materials and welding procedures one can conclude:
a) results of tensile test showed no difference in tensile strength.
b) bending and nick break test results are similar for both welding procedure.
c) HAZ hardness test result of SMAW welding procedure is higher than other joint regions for
each sector. GMAW-STT/FCAW presents almost same hardness result for each sector.
d) Absorbed energy is lower for root than for weld metal and HAZ.
5. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge Lincoln Electric for funding this research.

6. References
BAI, Y. Pipelines and Risers, Elsevier. 2001.
BOTT, I. S. et Al. High-strength steel development for pipelines: A Brazilian perspective. Metallurgical and Materials
Transactions A, v. 36A, p. 443 - 454, 2005.
HILLENBRAND, H. G. et Al. Procedures, Considerations for Welding X80 Line Pipe Established. Oil & Gas Journal,
v. 37, p. 47 - 56, Set., 1997.
MEYER, D. W. Flux cored arc welding. Welding Brazing and Soldering - Metals Handbook. American Society of
Metals, v. 6, 10 ed., p. 581 - 590, 1998.
ORDOEZ, R. E. C. Soldagem e caracterizao das propriedades mecnicas de dutos de ao API 5L X80 com
diferentes arames tubulares. Dissertao (Mestrado) - Faculdade de Engenharia Mecnica, Universidade Estadual de
Campinas, Campinas. 2004.
RATNAPULI, R. C. Consideraes metalrgicas de fabricao dos aos para tubos API 5L. 62 Congresso Anual da
ABM, Vitria, Esprito Santo: Associao Brasileira de Metalurgia e Materiais. 2007.
ROCHA, D. B. ; Brandi, S.D. ; Landgraf, F. G. ; SOUZA, A. C. ; MORAIS, Z. . Algumas consideraes sobre a
formao de agregados MA na junta soldada de ao API 5L-X80. In: XXXVI CONSOLDA Congresso Nacional de
Soldagem, 2010, Recife, PE. XXXVI CONSOLDA Congresso Nacional de Soldagem. Sao Paulo : ABS Associao
Brasileira de Soldagem, 2010. v. unico. p. 1-10.
ROCHA, D. B. ; Brandi, S.D. ; SOUZA, A. C. ; MORAIS, Z. . Estudo da Soldabilidade e Qualificao de Procedimento
de Soldagem do Tubo API 5L X80, Utilizando os Processos de Soldagem: MAG com Transferncia Controlada e
Eletrodo Tubular. In: Rio Oil & Gas Conference 2010, 2010, Rio de Janeiro, RJ. Rio Oil & Gas Conference 2010. Rio
de Janeiro : IBP, 2010a. v. unico. p. 1-10.
TAISS, J. M. O mercado de aos de elevado valor agregado, tendncias tecnolgicas e a estratgia da Usiminas no
atendimento s demandas: Workshop - Inovaes para Desenvolvimento de Aos de Alto Valor Agregado - Tubos de
Alta Resistncia para Aplicaes Estruturais e Transmisso de Fludos. 62 Congresso Anual da ABM, Vitria, Esprito
Santo: Associao Brasileira de Metalurgia e Materiais, 2007.
LINCOLN Electric Company. Innershield Wires, Product Catalog: Self-Shielded, Flux Cored Wires: C3.2000.
Catlogo. Cleveland, Ohio, Ago., 2002.
LINCOLN Electric Company. Pipeliner: Premium Pipe Welding Consumables: C1.100 Catlogo, Cleveland, Ohio, Jun.,
2003.
VALIM, M. T. Tenacidade fratura da junta soldada obtida a arco submerso de ao API 5L X80. Dissertao
(Mestrado) - Departamento de Cincia dos Materiais e Metalurgia, Pontifcia Universidade Catlica do Rio de Janeiro.
Rio de Janeiro 2005.
WAINER, E. (Org.) ; Brandi, S. D. (Org.) ; Mello, F. D. H. (Org.) . Soldagem: Metalurgia e processos. 2a. ed. Sao
Paulo: EDGARD BLUCHER, 1992. p. 359-370.
7

Rio Pipeline Conference & Exposition 2011


WAVEFORM Control Technology: Surface Tension Transfer - Open Root. Cleveland: The Lincoln Electric
Company, p. 6, 2006a.
WAVEFORM Control Technology: Surface Tension Transfer. Cleveland: The Lincoln Electric Company, p. 4,
nov., 2006.

You might also like