Controlling

Controlling Heat
Heat Treatment
Treatment
of
of Welded
Welded P91
P91
Hardness testing proves to be a powerful tool for checking the condition of P91
BY PATRIC DE SMET AND HANS VAN WORTEL

Modified 9Cr-1Mo, commonly referred to as P91, is widely used in the

power industry because of its superior
properties at elevated temperatures. P91
get its favorable strength and toughness
properties from its microstructure. The
desired microstructure can only be obtained using material with a well-balanced
chemical analysis and proper heat treatment. Heat treatment is an especially critical step during the manufacturing and
fabrication of P91.
P91 is a martensitic chromium-molybdenum steel, microalloyed with vanadium
and niobium, and with a controlled nitrogen content. In the as-welded condition,
P91s microstructure consists of fresh
martensite. This untempered martensite
is hard and brittle. The toughness is low
and the material is prone to stress corrosion cracking. In addition, while the creep
properties of fresh martensite are unknown, they can safely be assumed to be
unfavorable. Therefore, tempering of the
formed martensite in P91 after welding is
necessary to obtain the required service
properties. Proper heat treatment will result in tempered martensite with precipitated carbides (M23C6) and vanadium/
niobium-rich carbo-nitrides. The hardness of weld and base metal will be between 200 and 270 Vickers hardness number (VHN), and toughness will be sufficient, i.e., higher than 27 J (20 ft-lb) at
20C (68F).

Hardness of P91
The heat from welding will affect the
base metal. The heat-affected zone
(HAZ) starts directly adjacent to the weld
metal at the weld interface. A coarsegrained heat-affected zone (CGHAZ) in
the HAZ, and, farther away from the weld

interface, a fine-grained heat-affected

zone (FGHAZ) can be distinguished.
Figure 1 represents typical hardnesses
along a postweld heat-treated weld metal,
HAZ, and base metal of P91. Figure 1
shows that the highest hardness is found
in the CGHAZ, and the lowest hardness
in the FGHAZ. This FGHAZ is the area
with the weakest creep properties and the
location where the so-called Type IV
cracking occurs (Ref. 1).

Effects of Variation in Heat

Treatment Parameters
during PWHT
TNO Industrial Technology and NEM
performed many hardness tests on P91 in
different heat treatment conditions. Figure 2 illustrates the effects of various heat
treatments on weld metal (maximum)
hardness. The hardness is presented as a
function of the Larson Miller parameter
(LMP), which is used to characterize the
combination of heat treatment time and
temperature. The LMP is valid for the temperature of stress relief heat treatment.
Postweld heat treatment with an LMP
between the two dotted vertical lines in
Fig. 2 leads to good material properties.
The window of required heat treatment is
represented by 750C/2 h (i.e., LMP =
20.8) as the lower limit and 770C/10 h
(LMP = 21.9) as the upper limit.

Hardness Test as a
Control of PWHT
From Fig. 2, it is clear that there is a
direct relation between the Larson Miller
parameter and weighted average weld
metal hardness; most of the hardness values are expected to be below the average

trend line. Further, this figure shows that

the base metal hardness does not vary
much with LMP.
Base metal hardness is found at a level
somewhat above 200 VHN. Only at very
high values for LMP can a drop in hardness below, but still close to 200 VHN, be
found.
This close relation between hardness
and PWHT parameters (expressed as
LMP), for the weld metal, is very helpful
for checking the P91 condition after heat
treatment.
If a portable hardness test is used,
some care should be taken. Often the base
metal, weld metal, and HAZ are subjected
to hardness testing. However, considering the probe dimension, it is not easy to
test the narrow heat-affected zone. Even
if one could get some results out of the
HAZ, it is difficult to indicate if the values come from the FGHAZ or from the
CGHAZ. A relatively low value can be acceptable if it comes from the FGHAZ, but
unacceptable if it is found in the CGHAZ
Fig. 1.
A fair approach is to test only the weld
and base metals. Both of these zones can
be easily distinguished. Further, Brhl et
al. (Ref. 1) found that the FGHAZ
hardness is approximately 20 VHN lower
than the base metal. Based on the collected data, this fixed difference in
hardness between FGHAZ and base
metal is confirmed.
A relation between CGHAZ hardness
and weld or base metal hardness is less
pronounced, but it was found that the
CGHAZ is roughly up to 20 VHN higher
than the mean weld metal hardness.
Figure 2 can be used as a guide for interpretation of the test results, keeping
the accuracy of portable hardness testing
in mind. When analyzing portable test re-

PATRIC DE SMET (pdsmet@nem.nl) is welding and materials engineer for NEM b.v., The Netherlands, and HANS
(hans.vanwortel@tno.nl) is senior project manager at TNO Industrial Technology, The Netherlands.
42

JUNE 2006

VAN

WORTEL

CGHAZ

Base Metal

FGHAZ

Fig. 1 Typical hardness across P91 weld metal, HAZ, and base
metal in PWHT condition.

Fig. 2 Trend of hardness as function of Larson Miller parameter

(LMP).

Fig. 3 Charpy-V impact toughness as function of Larson Miller parameter (LMP).

Fig.4 Effect of PWHT above lower critical temperature A1.

sults, keep in mind that the accuracy is

lower than that of laboratory test results.
The effect of inadequate handling of the
test equipment, poor surface preparation
at test location, or testing on a decarburized or heavily deformed surface layer can
also lead to inaccurate results.

Toughness
In Europe, a Charpy-V impact toughness of 27 J (20 ft-lb) is generally considered as sufficiently ductile. Directive 97/23
of the European Parliament (Ref. 2), referred to as PED (pressure equipment directive) adopted this 27 J at 20C (or at
lowest operating temperature) as a safe
limit (Ref. 2). Some codes, however, require even higher values of 41 J (30 ft-lb)
(Refs. 3, 5).
Regarding toughness of a welded joint,
the weld metal is considered most critical.
Results of Charpy-V impact testing of

weld metal with varying LMP for weld

metal of submerged arc welds (SAW) is
illustrated by Fig. 3.
For SAW, it was found that the toughness in the as-welded condition is around
7 J. Only after a PWHT above LMP of
20.8 can a toughness higher than 27 J be
guaranteed. This is in line with the values
of filler metal suppliers. Most of the suppliers of P91 filler metals give data for
weld metal with a heat treatment around
760C (1400F)/2 h (LMP = 21).
Finally, it is interesting to note that
NEM and TNO found that in the PWHT
condition weld metals with acceptable
toughness showed hardnesses lower than
300 VHN.

ment at a too low LMP will result in a too

high weld metal hardness, and can easily
be found from hardness test results. Heat
treatment beyond 770C/10 h (i.e., too
high LMP) results in low hardness. As
long as the heat treatment temperature is
below the lower critical temperature A11,
the hardness will stay around 200 VHN,
even at a very long PWHT duration.
Heat treatment above the lower critical temperature A1 will ruin the materials properties (Ref. 4). Heat treatment
above A1 results in (partial) transformation of martensite into austenite.
The formed austenite will be transformed into fresh, hard martensite at
rather rapid cooling rates and into soft
ferrite at slow cooling rates. Both situa-

Intercritical PWHT
In some unfortunate cases, components may be postweld heat-treated out
of the required range. Postweld heat treat-

1. A1 is the lower transformation temperature. On heating, ferrite is partly transformed into austenite (a a +g ).

WELDING JOURNAL

43

tions are unwanted, but formation of ferrite is considered to be the worst situation
because creep strength drops to that for
grade P22.
The lower critical temperature, A 1, is
a function of nickel (Ni) and manganese
(Mn) (Ref. 6). For P91 base metal, A1 is
found at around 800830C. Weld metal
contains higher percentage Ni and Mn
and, therefore, has a lower A1. The lower
critical transformation temperature can
be estimated using the ORNL data-based
relation A1 = 84842(Ni[%]+Mn[%])
[C]. For Ni+Mn of 1.5%, the A1 is found
at around 785C (1445F), which is close
to the upper limit of PWHT.
Because of the poor properties of heat
treatment in the intercritical area (above
A1, below A3 [for A3 refer to footnote 2]),
it is very important to prevent such a
PWHT.
Depending on heat treatment temperature and cooling rate, basically four extreme situations are possible.
A. Heat treatment above weld and base
metal A1, followed by rapid cooling
B. Heat treatment above weld and base
metal A1, followed by slow cooling
C. Heat treatment above weld, but
below base metal A1, followed by rapid
cooling
D. Heat treatment above weld, but
below base metal A1, followed by slow
cooling.
Rapid cooling refers to a speed just
high enough to prevent ferrite formation
out of austenite.
Figure 4 illustrates situation A, PWHT
above weld and base metal A1, followed by
rapid cooling. Because of formation of
fresh martensite upon cooling, a higher
hardness is found for the base and weld
metals, as well.
Figure 4 also illustrates situation B, i.e.,
PWHT above weld and base metal A1, but
followed by slow cooling. Formed austenite is now transformed into soft ferrite, resulting in low hardness for weld and base
metal.
Experiments also showed that in the
case where the weld metal is heat-treated
above A1 but the base metal is below it
(situation D), low hardness values are
found in the range indicated in Fig. 4. Although no ferrite is formed in the base
metal, the hardness drops due to a soft annealing effect, i.e., coarsening of carbides.
Figure 5 represents situation C, i.e., for
PWHT above weld metal but below base
metal A1, followed by rapid cooling. The
weld metal now contains some fresh
martensite besides the tempered martensite. The base metal is softened due to
2. A3 is the upper transformation temperature. On heating, ferrite is transformed into
austenite (a +g g ).

44

JUNE 2006

Fig. 5 Effect of PWHT above weld metal, but below base metal A1, followed by rapid cooling.
coarsening of carbides. This situation may
be somewhat difficult to detect by hardness testing, since the hardness values are
comparable to the acceptable range for
weld metal and just below the required
base metal hardness. Knowing the initial
base metal hardness before PWHT will
help to distinguish this situation.

Final Materials Condition

Hardness is directly related to PWHT
time and temperature characterized as
LMP. This makes hardness testing a powerful tool for checking the materials condition. Testing only at the end of the line
after final PWHT is a good practice. However, it is better to start with a
hardness test on incoming material. This
helps to interpret the results after PWHT.
As has been shown, the base metal hardness is not expected to change during
manufacturing.
Further, it is clear that in order to obtain good service properties and toughness, the window for PWHT is relatively
narrow. A good practice is to perform a
furnace survey to ensure PWHT within
the required temperature window.
Finally, it is emphasized that not only
heat treatment temperature, but both
PWHT time and temperature (LMP) determine the effect of the PWHT cycle.
Postweld heat treatment within the
temperature range of 750 to 770C (1380
to 1420F) and an LMP of around 21 will
lead to good high-temperature properties
and toughness for a safe hydrostatic test
and to put the installation into service.

References

1. Brhl, F., et al. 1990. Behavior of the

9% chromium steel P91 and its weldments
in short and long term tests. Proceedings
of the ASME/IEEE Power Generation Conference. Boston, Mass. pp. 110.
2. Directive 97/23/EC of the European
Parliament and of the council. May 29,
1997, p. 23.
3. VdTV 511-2, p. 2.
4. Henry, J. F. 2005. Growing experience with P91/T91 forcing essential code
changes. Combined Cycle Journal,
1Q/2005.
5. Dutch Rules for Pressure Vessels,
Sheet M0110, p. 7.
6. Newel, W. 2002. Guideline for welding P(T)91 materials, EPRI, June, p. 9.