Seam Welded Lean Duplex Stainless Steel Tubing

P0214.
doc
Experience manufacturing alloy 19D (UNS S32001)

seam welded lean duplex stainless steel tubing for
subsea umbilical applications
Authors: Abstract splice, longitudinal seam and
Joseph W. McEnerney Alloy 19D (UNS S32001) is a orbital welds. Each of the weld
Gibson Tube Inc, USA recently commercialized lean types was tested and evaluated.
duplex (ferritic-austenitic) stainless The coils were manufactured in
Keywords: steel. Comparing the composition accordance with ASTM A 789 plus
Alloy 19D, lean duplex stainless steel, of alloy 19D to conventional duplex additional acceptance criteria. A
seam welded tubing, longitudinal and super duplex stainless steels, detailed description of the
seam weld, strip splice weld, orbital the chromium content is reduced, acceptance criteria and associated
weld, intermetallic phases, physical manganese is substituted for most testing is provided. Standard
properties data, dimensional data, of the nickel, and molybdenum is testing of the three weld types from
ferrite point count data, tensile test essentially eliminated. It offers the all of the production heats
data, hardness test data, surface higher strength associated with demonstrated desirable
roughness test data, burst test data, duplex stainless steel combined dimensional, microstructural and
rotational fatigue test data, subsea with lower cost and relative mechanical properties. The
umbilical tubing. freedom from detrimental microstructural characterization
intermetallic phase formation. consisted of an assessment of the
Eleven production heats of cold ferrite content. The mechanical
1. Introduction rolled alloy 19D strip, supplied by properties assessment consisted of
AK Steel, were converted to long tensile, hardness and burst testing.
Alloy 19D (UNS S32001) is a lean coils of seam welded tubing. Extensive rotational fatigue and
duplex (ferritic-austenitic) stainless Greater than 3.5 million feet of other additional tests were
steel that was developed and tubing have been produced and performed on samples from one of
patented by AK Steel and registered subsequently used to manufacture the production heats. This
as the trademark Nitronic 19D [ref. umbilicals for several subsea additional testing was performed
1]. Comparing the composition of installations in the Gulf of Mexico. on samples containing each of the
alloy 19D to conventional duplex and For subsea umbilical applications three weld types. Seam welded
super duplex stainless steels, the alloy 19D tubing is currently used alloy 19D tubing enables the
chromium content is reduced, with an externally extruded zinc production of long coils with
manganese is substituted for most of sheath. However, other external desirable properties and a greatly
the nickel, and molybdenum is protection systems are being reduced number of girth welds
essentially eliminated. Gibson Tube, considered. The coils of seam (strip splice or orbital) when
AK Steel, and SeaCAT Corporation welded tubing contained strip compared to seamless tubing.
conducted a joint development
program to produce seam welded reported [ref. 2]. Because of its lean of exposure to 25% boiling sodium
alloy 19D tubing. A summary of the composition, alloy 19D has a lower chloride with the pH = 1.5 (adjusted
development work and initial cost than the conventional and super with phosphoric acid).
production of tubing has previously duplex stainless steels.
been reported [ref. 2]. Seam welded Although an alloy’s compatibility with
alloy 19D tubing was first Alloy 19D is less corrosion resistant any service environments must
manufactured for production orders than either the conventional duplex always be carefully evaluated, alloy
during the summer of 2000. (2205) or super duplex (2507) 19D may be considered for some
stainless steels. For applications such applications where welded type 304L
1.1 Characteristics of as subsea umbilical tubing where austenitic stainless steel tubing is
alloy 19D is compatible with the currently used. However, because of
Alloy 19D
internal but not the external service its higher strength and lean
environment, a continuous zinc anode composition, alloy 19D welded tubing
Alloy 19D has several significant has been extruded on the outside offers design and cost advantages
characteristics. The mechanical surface. Other external protection over type 304L.
strength is higher than that for systems are being considered. These
austenitic stainless steels. Physical
properties such as lower coefficient of
systems could include multi-layer 1.2 Subsea umbilical tubing
coatings, with or without cathodic
thermal expansion and higher thermal protection. applications
conductivity also offer design
advantages over austenitic stainless Because of its duplex structure, alloy A recent paper presented at the
steels. Alloy 19D has relative freedom 19D offers improved resistance to Offshore Technology Conference
from the formation of detrimental chloride stress corrosion cracking summarizes the evolution of subsea
intermetallic phases compared to the (SCC) compared to austenitic umbilical design for applications in the
conventional or super duplex stainless steel alloys such as grades Gulf of Mexico [ref. 3]. Umbilicals
stainless steels. A summary of 304L and 316L. For example, AK provide the electrical power,
Gibson Tube and AK Steel Steel reports data [ref. 1] showing communications, chemical injection
evaluations regarding intermetallic SCC of alloy 304 in 127 hours, but no and hydraulic fluid power necessary
phase formation has previously been cracking of alloy 19D after 720 hours to control and operate subsea wells.
Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 1

P0214.doc
The cross-section has grown larger and to date SeaCAT Corporation has ranking chloride pitting corrosion
and ever more complex as the provided the same continuously resistance. Based upon the ranges
electric cables and tubing have been extruded zinc anode on the outside reported in Table 3, it can be seen
integrated into a single umbilical with surface as used for the HFI welded that alloy 19D is ranked between
more than twenty tubes. The paper Cr-Mo steel tubing. However, as grades 304L and 316L, but below
notes several driving forces behind previously discussed, alloy 19D could 2205 and 2507.
the evolution of subsea umbilical be used with other external protection
tubing. These driving forces include: systems. PRE = %Cr + 3.3 x %Mo + 16 x %N (1)
application to oil wells, dynamic
connections to floating hosts, The GTA seam welded alloy 19D Tensile and hardness test data for the
movement into the deeper waters of tubing has successfully demonstrated strip are reported in Table 4. This
the Gulf of Mexico, and lengths compatibility with hydrate/scale data is as reported by AK Steel.
greater than twenty miles (32 km). inhibitors that are corrosive to the Cr-
Mo steel tubing. GTA seam welded 3. Types of welds in
Early subsea umbilicals utilized alloy 19D tubing provides several
thermoplastic hose. However, the additional advantages. First, alloy finished Gibson Tube
increasing water depth, higher 19D tubing contains a forged GTA coils
operating pressure and aggressive longitudinal seam weld. As a result,
nature of the fluids resulted in the use GTA seam welded alloy 19D tubing All welds made by Gibson Tube
of super duplex stainless steel has a more uniform internal surface currently use the automatic,
(SDSS) tubing. Seamless alloy 2507 than the HFI weld on the Cr-Mo steel autogenous GTA welding process. In
SDSS tubing has been commonly tubing. Alloy 19D requires less addition, the longitudinal seam weld
used for subsea umbilicals. However, cleaning than the Cr-Mo steel. The for alloy 19D utilizes plasma
as a result of using seamless tubing, ability for alloy 19D to handle a wider preheating. Gibson Tube has recently
the lengths available have been range of internal fluids than the Cr-Mo installed a tubing mill that utilizes the
limited. In order to make long coils, steel provides more flexibility with laser welding (LW) process. Welding
straight lengths and/or short coils of regard to umbilical design and in trials using the LW process for alloy
seamless tubing must be joined using some cases may reduce the number 19D tubing are currently in progress.
girth welds. For projects requiring of tubes required. Alloy 19D may also
miles of tubing, this can result in the offer a more robust solution for water All welded tubing contains a
need to make thousands of girth based hydraulic fluids [ref. 3]. longitudinal seam weld along its
welds. The production of such large entire length. This weld is made after
numbers of girth welds can have an As of September 2001, seam welded the strip has been roll formed into a
adverse impact on both cost and alloy 19D has been manufactured for tubular shape. The strip edges are
delivery schedule. In addition, SDSS use as subsea umbilical tubing on brought together to form a square
such as alloy 2507 can form several projects in the Gulf of Mexico, butt, longitudinal weld joint. The gap
detrimental intermetallic phases. The including Serrano, Oregano, Nakika, between the butted edges is carefully
presence of intermetallic phases has Einset, Ladybug, Manatee and controlled to provide a consistent
been cited as the cause of industry Coulomb. This report summarizes weld. The weld is maintained under
reported failures of SDSS [ref. 3]. manufacturing and testing activities compressive load during solidification
associated with eleven production to prevent defects.
The need for a lower cost alternative heats of seam welded alloy 19D
to the SDSS resulted in the tubing produced for these projects. The longitudinal seam weld for alloy
development of zinc-sheathed, high 19D tubing is cold forged. Figure 1
frequency induction (HFI) seam 2. Strip shows a typical cross section of the
welded steel tubing by SeaCAT forged longitudinal seam weld from a
Corporation. The HFI welded tubing is production mill coil. The effect of the
manufactured from cold rolled Cr-Mo Tubing was manufactured from
eleven heats of strip supplied by AK cold forging is an improved weld
steel strip that is quenched and geometry and microstructure. After
tempered to produce high strength Steel. The strip was in accordance
cold forging, the outside and inside
after welding. A continuous zinc with ASTM A 240, UNS designation
S32001 [ref. 4]. The chemical surfaces of the longitudinal seam
anode is extruded on the outside weld are very uniform. The uniform
surface of the tubing. The zinc acts as compositions of the eleven heats of
strip are shown in Table 1. These geometry provides several benefits
a barrier and provides cathodic including an improved ability to
protection in case the sheath is values are as reported by AK Steel.
The requirements of the A 240 inspect the weld and elimination of
damaged. While this tubing has and potential sites for stress concentration
continues to be successfully used for specification are also listed in
and corrosion. While the amount of
subsea umbilical projects, the Table 1.
cold work and subsequent heat
introduction of scale inhibitors not treatment is not sufficient to fully re-
compatible with the Cr-Mo steel The compositions of two duplex (2205
and 2507) and two austenitic (304L crystallize the weld, some degree of
resulted in the need for a more grain refinement does occur. Long
corrosion resistant tubing. and 316L) stainless steels are
compared to alloy 19D in Table 2. coils of tubing produced by Gibson
Tube generally contain two additional
Gas tungsten arc (GTA) seam welded The pitting resistance equivalents
(PRE) have been calculated for each types of welds: strip splice and orbital.
alloy 19D tubing was jointly
developed by Gibson Tube, AK Steel of these alloys using Equation (1) and
Strip splice welds join the end of one
and SeaCAT Corporation to meet the the ranges of chemical compositions
shown in Table 2. The resulting PRE strip coil to another. These welds are
need for lower cost subsea umbilical used to enable continuous feeding of
tubing with increased corrosion ranges are shown in Table 3, with the
alloys listed in descending order of strip and thereby continuous
resistance. AK Steel provides the cold production of tubing at the mill. The
rolled strip, Gibson Tube PRE range. Calculation of an alloy’s
PRE is a commonly used means for strip splice weld is made on the
manufactures the seam weld tubing

P0214.doc
butted ends of strip cut at an angle. preheating, autogenous GTA welding, The calibration standard for eddy
When the strip is subsequently forging and induction heat treatment. current testing contains the four
formed and welded into tubing, the As of September 2001, greater than artificial flaws described below.
strip splice weld assumes a helical 3.5 million feet (1,067 km) of welded 1. Through-wall hole, 0.031-in.
orientation. tubing have been produced. (0.79-mm) maximum diameter.
Due to this helical orientation, the 2. Transverse notch on the outside
ends of the strip splice weld intersect 5. Quality assurance plan surface, 0.0065-in. (0.17-mm)
the longitudinal seam at two maximum depth.
locations. For the 0.625-in. OD x 3. Longitudinal notch on the outside
0.065-in. wall thickness (15.9-mm x Sections 5.1 to 5.5 describe the surface, 0.0065-in. (0.17-mm)
1.7-mm) alloy 19D tubing, the strip typical quality assurance plan that maximum depth.
coils from AK Steel have ranged in would be used for long coils of 4. Transverse notch on the inside
length from 1,500 to 3,200-ft. (460 to welded alloy 19D tubing intended for surface, 0.0065-in. (0.17-mm)
975-m). Depending upon the length of subsea umbilical applications. maximum depth.
the strip coil, two to four coils are Gibson Tube Quality Plans typically
joined with strip splice welds to include in-process monitoring of key
variables. For example, equipment 5.3 X-ray examination of strip
produce a 5,000 to 6,400-ft. (1,520 to
and/or recording forms are used at splice and orbital welds
1,950-m) master strip coil. The
master strip coil is then converted to a the mill to record welding parameters,
tubing mill coil of the same length with heat treatment temperature and other To date, examination of strip splice
one to three strip splice welds. important variables. and orbital welds has been performed
Specific plans are developed to meet using film-based radiographic
Orbital welds join two or more shorter the requirements of individual techniques in accordance with ASME
mill coils of seam welded tubing to customers. Section V [ref. 7].
produce a long coil. The orbital weld Examination of strip splice welds is
is made on butted ends of tubing. 5.1 Strip performed after they have been
Strip splice and orbital weld formed into a tubular shape, welded
procedure and performance Incoming strip is assessed for the and heat-treated. Examination of the
qualification is in accordance with desired weight per coil (PIW), orbital welds is performed after local
ASME Section IX [ref. 5] plus postweld heat treatment.
dimensions (width and thickness),
additional criteria. Several mill coils and chemical composition. Three radiographs imaged 0°, + 60°,
are joined to produce a 30,000-ft. Reported compliance by the strip and − 60°apart and oriented
(9,140-m) length reel for shipment. supplier on the mill test report is used perpendicular to the tubing are used
The typical number of orbital welds in as the basis for acceptance of to examine the strip splice and orbital
these reels is ten. This number is chemical composition and mechanical welds.
greater than the 5 to 6 expected properties. Ferrite point counting of
based upon the length of the mill the strip is performed by Gibson Gibson Tube has been attempting to
coils. This is due to shorter mill coils Tube. Positive material identification implement real time digital radioscopy
and the cut out of strip splice welds (PMI), using an x-ray fluorescence for x-ray examination of strip splice
rejected by x-ray examination or (XRF) alloy analyzer, is performed at and orbital welds. The digital system
tubing sections rejected by eddy receiving and the final reeling utilizes the same orientation and
current examination. operation. The dimensions of the strip number of images as film-based
are also monitored at the mill on an radiography. An interim system is
The strip splice and longitudinal seam in-process inspection basis. currently available and utilizes the x-
welds are heat treated by in-line ray tube and image intensifier
induction heating with a protective planned for incorporation in the final
5.2 Testing of mill coils in system. The interim system has
atmosphere. The orbital welds
receive local postweld heat treatment accordance with ASTM A manual manipulation and is not
(PWHT) by resistance heating with a 789 shielded. An automated multi-axis
protective atmosphere on the inside manipulation system with a fully
surface and air on the outside Dimensional, tensile, flange, shielded cabinet will be incorporated
surface. The oxide layer on the hardness, reverse flattening, and in the final system.
outside surface that results from the eddy current testing are performed in
local PWHT is subsequently removed accordance with the requirements of Gibson Tube has adopted the use of
using an abrasive pad. ASTM A 789. Test specimens are a wire image quality indicator (IQI) for
removed from the ends of mill coils x-ray examination. The essential wire
is based upon BS EN 462-3 [ref. 8]
4. Seam welded tubing and evaluated. Tensile tests are
and BS EN 462-1 [ref. 9]. European
performed on samples from one or
both coil ends and from each coil or standards provide more complete
All strip heats were converted to coverage of the wall thickness range
an agreed upon frequency,
0.625-in. OD x 0.065-in. wall associated with small diameter
depending upon customer
thickness (15.9-mm x 1.7-mm) tubing. tubing. For example, the first range
requirements.
The tubing was manufactured in for penetrated thickness, “w”, is “up to
accordance with ASTM A 789 [ref. 6]. 1.2 mm” (0.047-in.) in Table 9 of BS
Alloy 19D was recently added to Dual coil eddy current testing is
performed at the mills using a low EN 462-3. For a double-wall
ASTM A 789. Table 5 provides a radiographic technique, “w” equals 2t,
frequency to penetrate through the
summary of the tensile, hardness and where “t” is the single wall thickness.
wall thickness and a high frequency
heat treatment requirements that The “w” value of 1.2 mm (0.047-in.)
to examine the outside surface.
were approved for addition to A 789. corresponds to a single wall thickness
A second low frequency test is
performed off-line as the tubing is of 0.0235-in. (0.6 mm). In contrast,
All production tubing was the first range for single wall
manufactured using plasma being reeled for shipment.
thickness in Table T-276 of ASME

P0214.doc
Section V (ref. 7) is 0.25-in. (6.35 m), process hydrostatic test on the mill from the ends of 8-ft. (2.4 m) long
greater than 10 times larger. coils and rely on the customer FAT to sections of tubing. The 8-ft. (2.4 m)
test the reels. lengths were randomly selected from
Based upon the requirements of BS The in-process hydrostatic test of the approximately 1,000-ft. of tubing
EN 462-3, Table 9 and BS EN 462-1, mill coils consists of holding at yield manufactured for a special
Gibson Tube has adopted Set “A” of pressure for 1 ½ hours. The last thirty qualification program.
ASTM E 747 [ref. 10] as the IQI to minutes of the test must demonstrate The dimensional analysis and surface
use for x-ray examination of all pressure stability or the test cycle is roughness measurements described
tubing. The essential wire for 0.065- repeated. At the end of the test, the below were performed on one end of
in. (1.7 mm) wall thickness tubing is coil and cardboard placed under it are these 12-in. (305 mm) long samples.
the No. 2 and has a diameter of checked for leaks.
0.004-in. (0.10 mm). For the 0.625-in. OD x 0.065-in. wall 6.1 Dimensional
thickness (15.9-mm x 1.7-mm) tubing,
Gibson Tube and TWI Ltd. have just the coils are pressurized to 17,500 to measurements
completed a joint project to determine 18,000 psi (121 to 124 MPa). This
acceptance criteria for porosity in pressure range was established Table 6 provides the results of
alloy 19D girth welds (strip splice and based upon an evaluation in which dimensional measurements made at
orbital). dimensional measurements were the start and end of each mill coil.
Cut out production orbital welds with made on coils before and after The samples used to perform these
porosity were tested. First, the testing. The pressure range is measurements were removed after
porosity size was characterized by expected to cause minimal the tubing was coiled.
digital radioscopy. Before testing, dimensional change. The maximum and minimum outside
each weld was plastically strained (15 During the test, a transducer is used diameters as well as the wall
cycles) at the location of the to read pressure and a digital video thickness of the base metal and weld
maximum diameter pore to simulate recorder captures the pressure were measured. The average, 95%
the worst expected strain during versus time data. Pressure versus confidence interval, maximum, and
tubing manufacturing, zinc sheathing, time plots are then produced from the minimum values for each of the four
umbilical bundling, and installation. digital data. dimensional characteristics are
Each sample was then burst tested. reported for 950+ mill coils. The
TWI examined the fracture surfaces requirements of ASTM A 789 are also
5.5 Additional testing of mill shown in the table. The data
to determine the involvement, if any,
of the porosity and whether a coils and orbital welds demonstrate excellent control of
correlation existed between burst dimensions, well within the variation
pressure and porosity size. The frequency of testing of samples allowed by ASTM A 789.
TWI has concluded that a maximum from mill coils is based upon
single pore size acceptance limit of customer requirements. Specimens For the additional samples from heat
0.4 mm (0.016-in.) was reasonable. are mounted, polished, etched, and 301000, the outside diameter was
Gibson Tube has adopted an examined to assess the condition of measured at the LSW and three other
acceptance criteria based upon the the longitudinal seam weld. The locations at 45°increments around
size of the essential wire in the IQI. ferrite content of the longitudinal the circumference using a 1-in.
For the 0.065-in. (1.7 mm) wall seam and strip splice welds are (25.4 mm) micrometer with a flat anvil.
thickness tubing, a single, currently determined once at the start The wall thickness was measured at
subsurface, isolated pore with a of each new heat as described in the LSW and seven other locations at
diameter less than 0.004-in. Section 7.1. 45°increments around the
(0.10 mm) would be allowed. circumference using a 9/16-in. (14.3
Note that the acceptance criteria The frequency of testing of orbital mm) micrometer with a ball anvil.
adopted by Gibson Tube allows a weld samples is based upon
pore size less than 25% of the customer requirements. Tensile tests The outside diameter and wall
maximum recommended by TWI. and ferrite point counting, as thickness measurements were
described in Section 7.1, have been compared to the permissible
performed. variations in dimensions allowed by
5.4 Hydrostatic testing of mill
ASTM A 789. The results of the
coils dimensional analysis and
6. Dimensional and surface
ASTM A 789 requirements are
An in-process hydrostatic test of each roughness reported in Table 7. The data again
mill coil is performed by Gibson Tube. characterization demonstrate excellent control of
The alloy 19D mill coils for subsea dimensions, well within the variation
umbilical applications are 5,000 to Dimensional measurements taken allowed by ASTM A 789.
6,400-ft. (1,525 to 1,950-m) long. Six from the beginning and end of each
to eight of the mill coils are joined by mill coil are reported for all heats and 6.2 Surface roughness
orbital welding to produce 30,000-ft. additional measurement data is
(9,140-m) long reels. These reels are measurements
provided for samples from heat
then shipped to off-site customer 301000. In addition, surface
facilities. Two or more Gibson roughness data are reported for Surface roughness parameters were
Tube reels are combined to produce samples from heat 301000. determined using a Mitutoyo SJ-201
+60,000-ft. (18,300-m) zinc-sheathed surface roughness tester. ANSI B46.1
reels to be used for umbilical The tubing samples used for the [ref. 11] classifies this tester as a
bundling. The final acceptance test additional testing of heat 301000 Type V skidded instrument
(FAT) of these zinc-sheathed reels were as follows. The samples parameters only, stylus with
includes a hydrostatic test. contained only the longitudinal seam piezoelectric transducer. The detector
It was deemed to be more efficient for weld (LSW). Three samples, each 12- is described by Mitutoyo as shown
Gibson Tube to perform only an in- in. (305 mm) long, were removed below:

P0214.doc
Detecting method: splice weld, longitudinal seam weld, ferrite content of the strip, tubing base
differential inductance and orbital weld samples. metal and weld metal for the three
Stylus: The evaluations consisted of welds in all production heats was well
tip radius 5 µm (200 µin), 90°conical, assessment of the ferrite content. In within the acceptable range (35 to
diamond addition, photomicrographs were 60%) and mainly within the aim range
Skid: prepared to represent the typical (45 to 50%).
radius of curvature 40 mm (1.6 in) microstructure.
Measuring force: 7.2 Photomicrographs
4 mN (0.9 x 10-3 lbf) Strip specimens consisted of a
section oriented transverse to the
Figures 2 to 6 show
The parameters were determined in strip length or rolling direction.
photomicrographs representing the
accordance with ANSI B46.1, using Specimens from strip splice,
typical microstructure found in the
the phase correct Gaussian filter (PC longitudinal seam and orbital welds
consisted of sections oriented strip, strip splice weld metal,
50). The sampling length was 0.03-in.
longitudinal seam weld metal, tube
(0.76 mm) and the evaluation length transverse to the welding direction.
Evaluation of the tubing base metal base metal and orbital weld metal
was 0.15-in. (3.8 mm), i.e., five
respectively. These
sampling lengths of 0.03-in. (0.76 was performed on the same
photomicrographs reveal a relatively
mm). The parameters were specimen as that used for the welds
consistent microstructure for both the
determined with the detector moving (i.e., a section oriented transverse to
welds and base metal.
in the axial direction of the tubing. the welding direction).
Determinations were made on the
outside and inside surfaces at the It should be noted that based upon 8. Physical properties
LSW and three other locations at 90° previously reported evaluations by
increments around the circumference. both Gibson Tube and AK Steel [ref. The following physical properties data
The surface roughness parameters 2], it was determined that no have been provided by AK Steel. The
that were determined are listed below assessment for the presence of testing required for the density,
and are reported in Table 8. intermetallic phases was necessary. thermal expansion coefficient and
modulus of elasticity data were
Arithmetic mean deviation of profile, Ra 7.1 Ferrite content performed by AK Steel. The testing
for the specific heat and thermal
Maximum height of profile, Ry conductivity data were performed by
Point counting was in accordance
Ten-point height of irregularities, Rz with ASTM E 562 [ref. 12]. A 5 x 5 (25 Holometrix Micromet. The testing for
point) counting grid applied to 32 density, specific heat, thermal
Root-mean-square deviation of the fields (resulting in 800 points counted) conductivity, and coefficient of
profile, Rq was used. The 32 fields consisted of thermal expansion was performed on
two 16-field scans moving from the 0.065-in. (1.7 mm) thick mill annealed
As expected, all parameters showed outside to the inside surface. strip from heat number 301000. The
the roughness of the longitudinal The aim was to have a relative testing for modulus of elasticity was
seam weld (orientation weld 0°) on accuracy of 10% or less. The relative performed on 0.625-in. OD x 0.065-in.
the outside surface to be less than accuracy is defined as the 95% wall thickness (15.9-mm x 1.7-mm)
that at the inside surface. ANSI confidence interval divided by the tubing samples from heat 301000
B46.1, Figure B1 provides a average ferrite content. The ferrite containing a longitudinal seam weld.
comparison of the surface roughness, content was determined in the base
reported by Ra, for various common metal for the strip and in both the 8.1 Density
production methods. The longitudinal base and weld metal for strip splice,
seam weld roughness for both the longitudinal seam and orbital welds. Testing to determine density at room
outside (Ra 15 to 25 µ in.) and inside The arithmetic average (% Ferrite), temperature was performed in
surfaces (Ra 21 to 43 µ in.) the 95% confidence interval (±95% accordance with ASTM B 311 [ref.
corresponds to the range reported for CI) and the relative accuracy (% RA) 13]. AK Steel reports the density to be
grinding, thereby indicating a uniform are reported for the strip, strip splice 7.766 gm/cm3.
surface. welds, longitudinal seam welds and
orbital welds in Tables 9, 10, 11 and
The surface roughness 8.2 Specific heat
12 respectively.
measurements provide a direct
characterization of the effectiveness The data shown in Table 9 are based Testing to determine the specific heat
of the forging and sizing operations in upon one sample for each strip heat. was performed at 25, 260 and 538°C
achieving uniform weld surfaces. As The data for the strip splice and (77, 500 and 1000°F) using laser
previously stated, the uniform longitudinal seam welds shown in flash thermal conductivity techniques
surfaces provide several benefits Tables 10 and 11 are based upon in accordance with ASTM E 1461 [ref.
including an improved ability to one sample taken at the start of each 14]. Holometrix reports the results
inspect the longitudinal seam weld, new heat. The data for the orbital shown in Table 13.
elimination of potential sites for stress welds shown in Table 12 are based
concentration and corrosion, and upon one sample for each reel. The 8.3 Thermal conductivity
improved fluid flow characteristics. data for the orbital welds represent
100+ reels. For the orbital weld data, Testing to determine the thermal
7. Microstructural the range of % ferrite is reported conductivity was performed at
characterization along with the ±95% CI and % RA temperatures of 25, 260 and 538°C
corresponding to the limits of the (77, 500 and 1000°F) using laser
range. flash thermal conductivity techniques
Microstructural evaluations were
performed on the following: strip, strip in accordance with ASTM E 1461.
Tables 9 through 12 show that the Holometrix reports the results shown

P0214.doc
in Table 14. 9. Mechanical properties
It should be noted that the
8.4 Coefficient of thermal The mechanical properties of strip
requirements listed for alloy 19D in
these tables are based upon subsea
expansion splice, longitudinal seam, and orbital
umbilical specifications in effect when
weld samples were evaluated. The
the tubing was manufactured.
Testing to determine the coefficient of evaluations consisted of tensile,
Changes have recently been made to
thermal expansion was performed hardness, rotational fatigue and burst
subsea umbilical specifications with
over the range +20 to 650°C (68 to tests. Tensile tests at ambient
regard to the minimum UTS and the
1200°F) in accordance with ASTM E temperature were performed on all
maximum hardness. The minimum
228 [ref. 15]. The data below +25°C weld types from each of the heats.
UTS has been changed from 100,000
was disregarded due to test scatter in Additional tensile tests at various
to 110,000 psi (690 to 758 MPa). The
this region. A regression analysis was temperatures were performed on all
maximum hardness has been
performed on the data and the three weld types from heat 301000.
changed from 25 to 30 HRC.
instantaneous coefficients were Hardness testing was performed on
the longitudinal seam weld from each
determined at – 20, + 20 and 100°C Prior to discussing the tensile test
of the heats. Additional hardness
(– 4, 68, and 212°F). AK Steel reports data, it is important to consider the
tests, including weld cross section
the results shown in Table 15. The issue of appropriate design minimum
traverses, were performed on all
complete set of data (+20 to 650°C) is UTS, YS and E values for alloy 19D
three weld types for heat 301000.
available from AK Steel if information tubing containing all three weld types.
Burst testing was performed on all
regarding higher temperatures is As will be discussed in detail, the
weld types for each of the heats.
needed. autogenous orbital weld, when tested
Rotational fatigue testing was
in uniaxial tension transverse to the
performed on all weld types for heat
8.5 Modulus of elasticity weld, exhibits the lowest tensile
301000.
properties. Since prudent design
methodology dictates the use of
The modulus of elasticity was All testing was performed on 0.625-in.
properties reflective of the “weakest
determined in accordance with ASTM OD x 0.065-in. wall thickness (15.9-
link”, it would seem appropriate to
E 111 [ref. 16] at test temperatures of mm x 1.7-mm) tubing. Test
base the design minimum values for
– 20, + 21 and + 100°C (– 4, 70, and specimens generally consisted of 12-
subsea umbilical tubing upon the
212°F). The test temperature in. (304.8 mm) long sections for the
orbital weld. From this perspective,
tolerance was ±5°C (±9°F). The tensile, hardness and burst tests. The
certain current minimum requirements
results are reported in Table 16. Each specimens used for tensile testing at
and the recent increase in UTS do not
specimen was pre-strained three various temperatures were 8-in.
appear to be appropriate. Based upon
times to approximately 7,000 lbf (31 (203.2 mm) long, with 4-in. (101.6
the orbital weld, appropriate design
MN) to remove the hysteresis. The mm) between the grips and a 2-in.
minimum values would be:
average 0.2% offset yield strength (50.8 mm) gage length. The
UTS: 100,000 psi (690 MPa)
was estimated to be 85,000 psi (586 specimens for rotational fatigue
YS: 70,000 psi (483 MPa)
MPa). By multiplying the cross testing were 33.5 in. (850 mm) long.
E: 10%.
sectional area of each tube by 85,000 For specimens with a strip splice or
psi (586 MPa) and taking 75% of the orbital weld, the weld was located at
All samples representing the three
value, it was determined that 7,000 lbf approximately the center of the test
weld types exceeded the minimum
(31 MN) would be sufficient to remove specimen.
UTS requirement in effect at the time
the hysteresis. After pre-straining the of manufacture. All tests for strip
specimens, the gages were applied 9.1 Tensile test data for splice and longitudinal seam weld
and testing proceeded. Each reported production heats samples also exceeded the new UTS
modulus of elasticity represents the requirement. The orbital welds for six
average of three tests. of the heats had UTS values below
Tensile testing was performed in
accordance with ASTM A 370 [ref. the new requirement. The average
8.6 Comparison of physical 17]. The ultimate tensile strength UTS values for all orbital weld heats
properties to other (UTS), 0.2% yield strength (YS) and were above the new requirement.
stainless steels elongation (E) in 2-in. (50.8-mm) were
determined. Tensile test data are All strip splice and longitudinal seam
reported in Tables 18 to 20. weld samples exceeded the minimum
Table 17 provides a comparison of YS requirement. Orbital weld YS met
physical properties reported in the minimum requirements for some
Sections 8.1 to 8.5 for alloy 19D to Table 18 reports data for strip splice
welds and is based upon the average heats and did not for others. For six
types 304/304L, 316/316L, 2205 and heats (391666, 201595, 410111,
2507 stainless steels. The data for of two samples produced at the start
of each new heat. Tables 19 and 20 410434, 310426 and 410754), all
the other stainless steels were samples exceeded the minimum YS
obtained from the product data sheets provide data from a larger population
of seam welded tubing and orbital requirement. For three of the five
of various strip suppliers. As heats with samples below the
discussed in Section 1.1 the weld samples. The data for the tubing
was generally taken from a sample at minimum YS (301000, 201596 and
coefficient of expansion is lower and 310106), the average value exceeded
the start of every fourth mill coil. The
the thermal conductivity is higher for the minimum requirement, with at
duplex stainless steels as compared data for the orbital welds represents a
sample taken from the end of each least one sample below the minimum.
to the austenitic stainless steels. This Two heats (410078 and 201694) had
offers design advantages. reel. The average, 95% confidence
interval, maximum, and minimum average YS values below the
values for each of the tensile minimum requirement.
properties are reported for the tubing
and orbital welds in Tables 19 and 20. The elongation for all longitudinal
seam weld samples exceeded the

P0214.doc
minimum requirement. The elongation of these welds is attributed to their constant throughout the remaining
for the strip splice and orbital welds uniform geometry which results manufacturing stages.
generally did not meet the minimum directly from the fact that the welds
requirement. are autogenous. One can therefore It should be noted that Gibson Tube
view the reduced yield strength and has made a conscious effort to
The reasons for the low yield strength elongation as a trade-off for improved minimize the degree of cold working
of the orbital welds and the low fatigue performance. of the tubing during the manufacturing
elongation of strip splice and orbital stages. Two strategies were used to
welds are related to the lower 9.2 Tensile test data as a accomplish this objective. First, the
strength of the autogenous weld tubing is coiled off the mill to a
function of temperature
metal and the orientation between diameter ranging from 5 to 7-ft. (1.5 to
these welds and the applied tensile 2.1 m) to minimize strain. Second, by
stress. Autogenous girth welds are Tensile tests at various temperatures combining the final eddy current test
generally expected to experience were performed on tubing samples with the final reeling operation, the
strain accumulation within the weld containing each of the three weld mill coil is only uncoiled and
metal during tensile loading types. The yield strength (0.2% and straightened once before final reeling.
transverse to the weld. Such loading 1% offset methods), ultimate tensile
is applied to these girth welds during strength, and elongation in 2 in. (50.8 Table 23 compares tensile test data
a uniaxial tensile test. mm) were determined in accordance representing manufacturing stages at
with ASTM A 370 [ref. 17], E 8 [ref. Gibson Tube and SeaCAT. The data
The strip splice weld, due to its helical 18] and E 646 [ref. 19] for test for Gibson Tube are based upon 20
orientation, is expected to exhibit temperatures of – 20, + 22 and + tests while that for SeaCAT are based
behaviour that represents a 100°C (– 4, 72, and 212°F). The test upon two tests. The data are again
composite of base metal and weld temperature tolerance was ±5°C (± from one heat, number 201595. The
metal properties. As a result, the yield 9°F). The results are reported in purpose of this data was to identify
strength for the strip splice welds Table 21 along with the ambient the degree of cold work resulting from
exceeded the minimum, while that for temperature requirements of subsea the SeaCAT manufacturing process.
the orbital welds did not. Specifically, umbilical tubing specifications in When comparing tubing after the
the yield strength of the as-cast weld effect when the tubing was Gibson Tube mill coiler with that after
structure of the autogenous weld is manufactured. The testing was the SeaCAT final acceptance test, the
expected to be lower than that of the performed by AK Steel. data show an increase of
base metal. The strain for the orbital approximately 3,400 psi (23 MPa) in
weld concentrates solely in the weld The test results reflect the expected ultimate tensile strength, an 800 psi
metal, while that for the strip splice changes in tensile behaviour as the (5.5 MPa) increase in yield strength
weld is shared between base metal test temperature is varied above and and a 2.6 percentage point decrease
and weld metal. As a result, the yield below ambient conditions. The data in elongation.
strength for the strip splice weld tends appear relatively consistent except for
to be higher. one orbital weld tested at – 20°C (– 9.4 Hardness data for
4°F). No explanation is offered for the
The same concept applies to the apparent low UTS and elongation production tubing
elongation. However, the elongation associated with this test.
data for the strip splice welds also Hardness measurements were made
at both ends of all mill coils in
exhibited low values. This is due to 9.3 Assessment of the degree
the nature of how the strip splice weld accordance with ASTM A 370 [ref.
of cold work during tubing 17]. The average hardness, 95%
fails and the operational
characteristics of the tensile test manufacturing confidence interval, maximum, and
equipment. When the strip splice weld minimum values were determined for
fails during a uniaxial tensile test, it Table 22 provides a comparison of each heat.
first separates in the center of the tensile test data for tubing from
helical shaped weld. The failure then various stages in the manufacturing The data are summarized by heat for
propagates through the strip splice process at Gibson Tube. Data for 950+ mill coils in Table 24. As shown,
weld metal in two directions following three of the four process stages are the average hardness for all heats is
a helical orientation towards the two based upon only one test, while that slightly below the maximum
points of intersection with the for one stage was based upon 22 requirement for subsea umbilical
longitudinal seam weld. In some samples. All data is from one heat, tubing in effect at the time of
instances, the tensile test equipment number 310106. The purpose of this manufacturing. However, the
will terminate the test shortly after the testing was to identify the degree of maximum values for eight of the
initial rupture, but before the final cold working/strain hardening eleven heats exceed the limit of HRC
ligament fails at the intersection with resulting from the Gibson Tube 25. As previously discussed, the
the longitudinal seam weld. In these manufacturing process. It should be maximum hardness requirement in
situations, the elongation may be noted that the data for the strip is as the specification for subsea umbilical
lower than those cases where the reported by AK Steel, while the data tubing is being increased to HRC 30.
sample has separated into two for the tubing was based upon testing None of the tubing exceeds this
pieces. by Gibson Tube. When comparing the value.
tubing after final reeling with the strip,
When considering the reduced yield the data show an increase of 9.5 Additional hardness
strength and elongation associated approximately 9,300 psi (64 MPa) in testing and traverses
with the strip splice and orbital welds, ultimate tensile strength, no increase
it is important to recognize that they in yield strength and a 3 percentage
point decrease in elongation. Once Five Vickers hardness HV 10
result from the fact that the welds are
(nominal test force = 98.97 N [22.25
autogenous. In Section 9.7 the the tubing is coiled at the mill, the
tensile behaviour remained relatively lbf]) test measurements were made
superior rotational fatigue behaviour

P0214.doc
on the outside surface of the samples for alloy 19D both the requirements of particular values along the fit line. In
listed below from heat 301000 in ASTM A 789 and the recommended effect, the width of the interval
accordance with ASTM E 92 [ref. 20]. design requirements for subsea provides an indication of how good
umbilical tubing based upon the the estimate of the mean was at
Base metal region ~ 180°away from orbital weld are included. Also note particular points along the fit line. The
the LSW on two LSW samples that two UNS designations for alloy linear regression analysis included
2205 (S32205 and S31803) are only data points where failure
LSW weld metal region on two LSW listed. As shown in the table, the occurred. The number of data points,
samples minimum required tensile strength for by weld type, used in each of the
alloy 19D umbilical tubing is three separate regression analyses
SSW weld metal region on two SSW somewhat less than that of alloy 2507 was as follows: LSW: 24, SSW: 13,
samples and greater than alloy 2205, UNS OW: 12. Data points where the test
designation S32005. However, based was stopped before failure were not
OW weld metal region on two OW upon Gibson Tube’s extensive included in the regression analysis.
samples experience manufacturing S32205
seam welded tubing, the tensile The B-curve from Table 8.4.1.b in
This testing was performed by AK strength, yield strength and hardness Norwegian Standard NS 3742 E [ref.
Steel. The average, minimum and are expected to be slightly higher 22] has also been plotted in Figures
maximum values for the five than those for alloy 19D, while its 10 through 12. The B-curve is
measurements are reported in elongation would be slightly lower. described by Equation (2) and
Table 25. Conversion of the HV 10 The significant strength advantage of provides a characteristic SN curve for
hardness measurements to HRC alloy 19D tubing over the two structures in sea-water with cathodic
results in all values being less than austenitic grades is readily apparent. protection. The B-curve allows the
the maximum hardness requirement highest stress range and is based
of HRC 25 in effect at the time the 9.7 Rotational fatigue testing upon a constant stress range of 48
tubing was manufactured. MPa (7,000 psi) beyond 2 x 108
cycles to failure. This curve is
Rotational fatigue testing was
A series of Vickers hardness HV 0.5 applicable to full penetration butt
performed on all three weld types
(nominal test force = 4.903 N [1.10 welds with the weld finished flush with
from heat 301000. Thirty tests were
lbf]) test measurements were made the surface. The weld is assumed to
planned for each of the three weld
on cross sections of all three weld be free of significant defects based
types, with ninety total tests. To date, upon the use of non-destructive
types from heat 301000 in
sixty tests have been completed,
accordance with ASTM E 384 [ref. examination. The B-curve is therefore
twenty-four longitudinal seam,
21]. Each traverse was perpendicular applicable to the three types of welds
eighteen strip splice and eighteen
to the axis (direction of travel) of the found in alloy 19D seam welded
orbital welds.
weld. The traverses were performed tubing.
at approximately mid-thickness and
Duco Ltd. performed the testing.
consisted of 26 measurements N = 10(15.01 – 4 log (∆σ)) (2)
During a test, the tubing is bent to
spaced at approximately 0.020-in.
produce the desired stress level on
(0.5 mm) arc distance increments. Where:
the outside surface of the tubing. A
These traverses started in the base N = number of cycles to failure
strain gauged sample was bent to
metal on one side of the weld 0.25-in.
various diameters and used to directly ∆σ = fully reversed stress range
(6.35 mm) from the weld centerline
measure the stress on the outside
and terminated at the same distance All alloy 19D data points (failed and
surface. From this data, a calibration
on the opposite side of the weld. This stopped) and fit lines were well above
curve was determined and used to
testing was performed by AK Steel. the B-curve indicating that all three
set the degree of bending needed to
The results are reported in Tables 26, weld types exceeded the most
achieve the desired stress during
27 and 28. In addition, the data from stringent design criteria. In addition,
testing. For all tests, the tubing was
Tables 26 to 28 are plotted in Figures the rotational fatigue performance of
rotated at a maximum rate (RPM)
7, 8, and 9. all three weld types is very similar.
such that the temperature of the test
specimen remained below 25°C The current fit suggests that at high
As expected, the hardness of the stress the strip splice weld may have
(77°F) during the test. The rotation of
weld metal was lower than that of the the limiting lower bound while at low
the tubing produces fully reversed
base metal. The orbital welds had the stress the orbital weld may have the
fatigue loading.
lowest and most consistent hardness limiting bound. This relative
values. The higher and less positioning of the linear data fit is
The stress range versus number of
consistent hardness values of the related to the number of failure data
cycles to failure (SN) curves are
strip splice and longitudinal seam points at low stress. Specifically, only
plotted in Figures 10, 11, and 12 for
welds is attributed to the effects of the strip splice weld has a failure data
the longitudinal seam (LSW), strip
forging and roll sizing.
splice (SSW), and orbital welds (OW) point greater than 106 cycles. The
respectively. Only a linear regression data also suggest that the endurance
9.6 Comparison of tensile and fit of the data and the upper and lower limit for the strip splice and orbital
welds may be as high as 400 MPa
hardness properties to 95% confidence limits (CL) are
(58,000 psi). Note that this compares
other stainless steels plotted in each of these figures. The
to an endurance limit of 48 MPa
regression analysis and subsequent
plotting of the linear fit and confidence (7,000 psi) for the design curve. It is
The tensile and hardness planned to continue the stopped tests
limits were performed using
requirements for alloy 19D seam to help establish the endurance limit.
OriginLabTM version 6.1 software. The
welded tubing are compared to those The remaining thirty tests (6 LSW, 12
confidence limit represents a central
of two duplex (2507 and 2205) and SSW and 12 OW) are planned to both
confidence interval on the mean
two austenitic (304L and 316L)
number of cycles to failure at develop more data in the range of 104
stainless steels in Table 29. Note that to 107 cycles to failure and establish

P0214.doc
the endurance limit. orbital welds have also been plotted excluding a smaller number of welds
in Figure 13 and identified as – 2SD with demonstrated similar if not higher
Current specifications for alloy 19D Limit 2507 OW “Worst” and “Best” fatigue performance (orbital welds in
subsea umbilical tubing do not allow Data Set respectively. alloy 19D). Fatigue testing is currently
the use of orbital welds in the being performed on an umbilical
dynamic section. Based upon the Figure 13 demonstrates that the – mock-up with autogenous alloy 19D
similar performance of all three weld 2SD limit curves for all three alloy orbital welds. The results of this
types, it appears appropriate to use 19D welds fall within the upper 15% testing should provide additional
both alloy 19D strip splice and orbital of the region of design SN curves for insight.
welds in the dynamic section. the 2507 orbital welds.
The – 2SD limit curve for the alloy 9.8 Burst testing
It would be desirable to compare the 19D strip splice weld was the highest
fatigue performance of orbital welds and slightly above that for the upper
in seamless super duplex stainless 2507 orbital weld curve. Two samples for each of the three
weld types were burst tested for each
steel (SDSS) umbilical tubing to those The – 2SD limit curves for the alloy
of alloy 19D. Unfortunately, no open 19D longitudinal seam and orbital production heat. The samples were
removed prior to the coiling operation
literature data for representative welds were slightly below the upper
at the tube mill.
automatic orbital welds in SDSS 2507 orbital weld curve.
Tap water was used as the test
tubing were available for comparison. This relative positioning is related to
media. Beginning at 0 psig, the
A significant number of orbital welds, the effect of both forcing the slope to
pressure was increased in increments
one every 30 to 40 m (98 to 131 ft.), – 4 and the standard deviation.
of 5,000 psig (34.5 GPa), held for one
must be present in the dynamic It should be noted that this treatment
section for any seamless SDSS of the data provides a different minute and then increased until the
pressure reached approximately 80%
umbilical tubing. Since these welds relative comparison than the
are likely to use added filler metal, statistical treatment used in Figures of the calculated burst pressure
(CBP).
their fatigue performance may be 10 through 12.
The pressure was then increased in
adversely influenced by the geometry Observing where actual data points
increments of 1,000 psig (6.9 GPa)
of the weld. While specific data were lie (both for alloy 19D and 2507) is
until the sample burst. The burst
not available, it was reported [ref. 23] also illuminating.
pressure and the region of the sample
that two curves describe a region of
where the failure occurred were
design SN curves for orbital welds in Although the actual data points are
seamless SDSS. The differences not plotted, below approximately 590 determined. A pressure versus time
plot was recorded for each sample
between the curves in the region MPa (85,500 psi) all alloy 19D strip
using a digital video recorder.
reportedly [ref. 23] relate to different splice and orbital weld data (both
tubing dimensions (diameter and wall failed and stopped tests) exhibit
The CBP was based upon Equation
thickness) and testing methods. higher fatigue strength than the
(4). This equation is derived from a
The curves are based upon Equation 2507 orbital weld upper – 2SD limit
draft ISO standard for subsea control
(3) and represent the minus two curve.
standard deviation (– 2SD) limit for It should be noted that the lower umbilicals [ref. 24]. It is specifically
derived from an equation in this
the “best” (upper curve) and “worst” curve cut-off for the 2507 data was
(lower curve) sets of data within the 200 MPa (29,000 psi) and the upper standard used to calculate the
maximum hoop stress at the bore for
region. curve cut-off was 400 MPa
(58,000 psi). Although alloy 19D strip tubing with Do/tnom ≤20, where Do is
Log (N) = Log (a) – 2SD – 4Log (?s) (3) splice and orbital welds above the nominal outside diameter and tnom
590 MPa (85,500 psi) were slightly is the nominal wall thickness. This
Where: below the 2507 orbital weld upper – equation provides a conservative
N = number of cycles to failure 2SD limit curve, it reasonable to representation of the stress condition
Log (a) = mean value of intercept expect that they exceed comparable in comparison to the von Mises
SD = standard deviation of Log (a) SDSS orbital weld data. The higher equivalent stress. Since the von
?s = fully reversed stress range fatigue strength of the autogenous Mises equivalent stress is still based
alloy 19D girth welds (strip splice and upon the maximum stress at the
The lower curve (worst) is the B- orbital) results from their uniform inside surface, the actual burst
Curve (intercept 15.01, slope – 4) and geometry. pressure will be higher due to the
the upper curve (best) has an lower average stress across the wall
intercept of 16.5 and slope – 4. These Regrettably, the inability to directly thickness.
curves were determined by a linear compare data points has hindered the
CBP = (UTSmin x [(ODnom ) 2 –
regression analysis in which the slope comparison between alloy 19D and
(IDnom) 2])/[(ODnom )2 + (IDnom )2] (4)
of the fit was forced to use – 4. In 2507. In addition, it is recognized that
order to compare the alloy 19D welds good engineering practice suggests Where:
to these bounds, linear regression proceeding with caution regarding the UTSmin = minimum ultimate tensile
analyses were performed using the design of the dynamic section of an strength (psi)
forced slope of – 4. umbilical. However, on the basis of ODnom = nominal outside diameter (in.)
Using the intercept and standard the available comparison it is IDnom = nominal inside diameter (in.)
deviation from this regression reasonable to conclude that the alloy
analysis and Equation (3), the – 2SD 19D girth welds (strip splice and The results of the burst testing are
limits were determined and are orbital) exhibit similar if not superior shown in Table 30. Using the
plotted in Figure 13 for each of the fatigue performance compared to the minimum UTS in effect at the time
three alloy 19D weld types. The 2507 orbital welds. It therefore does that the tubing was manufactured and
resulting intercepts for the three alloy not appear reasonable to allow a the nominal tubing dimensions, the
19D welds were LSW: 16.33, SSW: larger number of welds with similar or CBP for the tubing is 22,906 psi (158
16.51, and OW: 16.30. The upper and potentially lower fatigue performance MPa) based upon Equation (4) and
lower bound curves for the 2507 (orbital welds in SDSS) while 20,088 psi (139 MPa) based upon the

P0214.doc
von Mises equivalent stress. microstructural, and mechanical November 13-15, 2001.
It is important to note that the CBP properties. [3] V.T. Williams and C.M. Ross,
does not represent a minimum “Technical Improvements
required burst pressure. It is simply 6. It appears appropriate to base Incorporated in One Company’s
an estimate of the burst pressure design minimum tensile test Subsea Umbilical and
subject to the limitations of the three requirements for subsea Distribution Systems”, Paper
inputs: predicted stress state, ultimate umbilical tubing on the orbital Number OTC 13121, presented
tensile strength and tubing weld. at the 2001 Offshore Technology
dimensions. While each customer Conference, Houston, Texas,
establishes specific minimum 7. Rotational fatigue testing of the April 30 to May 3, 2001.
required burst pressures, it is three weld types in alloy 19D [4] ASTM A 240/A 240M-00,
expected that these minimum tubing demonstrated consistent “Standard Specification for Heat-
required values will be less than the behaviour, well above the Resisting Chromium and
CBP by a desired safety margin. standard design curve used for Chromium-Nickel Stainless Steel
umbilical tubing. Plate, Sheet, and Strip for
The results shown in Table 30 Pressure Vessels”, 2001 Annual
indicate that the burst pressure for all 8. The rotational fatigue behaviour Book of ASTM Standards, Vol.
of the tubing tested was in excess of of alloy 19D orbital welds was 01.03, Steel- Plate, Sheet, Strip,
the CBP using the minimum UTS in comparable to that of alloy 19D Wire; Stainless Steel Bar,
effect at the time of manufacture. strip splice and longitudinal seam American Society for Testing and
Using the recently increased welds and 2507 orbital welds. As Materials.
minimum UTS, the CBP for the tubing a result, it appears reasonable to [5] Section IX, Welding and Brazing
is 25,196 psi (174 MPa) based upon allow the use of alloy 19D orbital Qualifications, ASME Boiler and
Equation (4) and 22,097 psi (152 welds in the dynamic section of Pressure Vessel Code, 1998
MPa) based upon the von Mises umbilical tubing. Edition.
equivalent stress. Only one of the [6] ASTM A 789/A 789M-01a,
sixty-six burst tests did not exceed 9. Seam welded alloy 19D tubing “Standard Specification for
the CBP calculated using Equation enables the production of long Seamless and Welded
(4). Considering that the minimum coils for subsea umbilical tubing Ferritic/Austenitic Stainless Steel
required burst pressure will be applications with desirable Tubing for General Service”,
significantly less than the CBP properties and a greatly reduced 2001 Annual Book of ASTM
(calculated by either method), the number of girth welds when Standards, Vol. 01.01, Steel-
burst pressure for all tubing tested is compared to seamless tubing. Piping, Tubing, Fittings,
expected to readily exceed any American Society for Testing and
minimum requirements. Materials.
Acknowledgements [7] Section V, Nondestructive
10. Conclusions Examination, Article 2,
Many personnel at Gibson Tube Radiographic Examination,
contributed to this effort. Phil Lewis of ASME Boiler and Pressure
1. Seam welded alloy 19D tubing SeaCAT Corporation was the driving Vessel Code, 1998 Edition.
offers advantages over other force behind the application of seam [8] BS EN 462-3: 1997, Non-
duplex and austenitic stainless welded alloy 19D tubing for subsea destructive testing – Image
steels. umbilical applications. Richard quality of radiographs, Part 3.
Fletcher of TWI Ltd. directed the Image quality classes for ferrous
2. The lean composition of alloy porosity acceptance criteria program. metals, British Standards
19D results in lower cost and John Tack directed the various testing Institute, 1997.
essentially no propensity to form performed by AK Steel. Rotational [9] BS EN 462-1: 1994, Non-
detrimental intermetallic phases. fatigue testing was directed by Peter destructive testing – Image
Fellows of Duco Ltd. In addition, quality of radiographs, Part 1.
3. As a duplex stainless steel alloy Peter Fellows graciously shared his Image quality indicators (wire
19D offers both increased knowledge of umbilical tubing design type) – Determination of image
mechanical properties and and provided guidance with regard to quality value, British Standards
resistance to chloride stress various issues, especially the design Institute, 1994.
corrosion cracking compared to of the porosity acceptance test [10] ASTM E 747-97, “Standard
austenitic stainless steels. program. Knut Ekeberg, Torfinn Practice for Design, Manufacture
Ottesen and Stian Karlsen, Nexans and Material Grouping
4. Although the corrosion resistance Norway AS, demonstrated great Classification of Wire Image
of alloy 19D is reduced due to its patience and persistence in Quality Indicators (IQI) Used for
lean composition, a continuous describing their design SN curves for Radiology”, 2000 Annual Book of
extruded external zinc anode or orbital welds in alloy 2507 tubing. ASTM Standards, Section Three,
other means can be used to Metals Test Methods and
provide the required external References Analytical Procedures, Volume
corrosion resistance while its 03.03, Nondestructive Testing,
internal corrosion resistance is American Society for Testing and
adequate for expected umbilical [1] AK Steel, Product Data Bulletin
Materials, 2000.
tubing service. Nitronic 19D, October 2000. [11] ASME B46.1-1995 (Revision of
[2] J.W. McEnerney, Alloy 19D ANSI/ASME B46.1-1985),
5. Extensive testing of seam welded (UNS S32001) seam welded lean Surface Texture (Surface
alloy 19D tubing and all duplex stainless steel tubing, Roughness, Waviness, and Lay),
associated welds from eleven paper number P0117, Stainless The American Society of
production heats demonstrated Steel World 2001 Conference, Mechanical Engineers, 1995.
desirable dimensional, The Hague, the Netherlands, [12] ASTM 562-99, “Standard Test

P0214.doc
Method for Determining Volume Temperature Tests;
Fraction by Systematic Manual Metallography, American Society
Point Count”, 2000 Annual Book for Testing and Materials.
of ASTM Standards, Vol. 03.01, [21] ASTM E 384-99, “Standard Test
Metals- Mechanical Testing; Method for Microindentation
Elevated and Low-Temperature Hardness of Materials”, 2001
Tests; Metallography, American Annual Book of ASTM
Society for Testing and Materials. Standards, Vol. 03.01, Metals –
[13] ASTM B 311-93 (1997), “Test Mechanical Testing; Elevated
Method for Density and Low-Temperature Tests;
Determination for Powder Metallography, American Society
Metallurgy (P/M) Materials for Testing and Materials.
Containing Less than Two [22] Norwegian Standard NS 3472 E,
Percent Porosity”, 2001 Annual Steel structures Design rules, 2nd
Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. edition June 1984.
02.05, American Society for [23] Private communications with
Testing and Materials. Knut Ekeberg, Torfinn Ottesen
[14] ASTM E 1461-92, “Test Method and Stian Karlsen, Nexans
for Thermal Diffusivity of Solids Norway AS, October 3-5, 2001.
by the Flash Method”, 2000 [24] ISO/DIS 13628-5, Petroleum and
Annual Book of ASTM natural gas industries – Design
Standards, Vol. 14.02, American and operation of subsea
Society for Testing and Materials. production systems – Part 5:
[15] ASTM E 228-95, “Test Method Subsea control umbilicals, Draft.
for Linear Thermal Expansion of
Solid Materials With a Vitreous
Silica Dilatometer”, 2000 Annual
Book of ASTM Standards, Vol.
14.02, American Society for
Testing and Materials.
[16] ASTM E 111-97, “Standard Test
Method for Young’s Modulus,
Tangent Modulus, and Chord
Modulus”, 2001 Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, Vol. 03.01,
Metals – Mechanical Testing;
Elevated and Low-Temperature
Tests; Metallography, American
Society for Testing and Materials.
[17] ASTM A 370-97a, “Standard Test
Methods and Definitions for
Mechanical Testing of Steel
Products”, 2001 Annual Book of
ASTM Standards, Vol. 01.03,
Steel- Plate, Sheet, Strip, Wire;
Stainless Steel Bar, American
Society for Testing and Materials.
Methods for Tension Testing of
Metallic Materials”, 2001 Annual
03.01, Metals – Mechanical
Testing; Elevated and Low-
Temperature Tests;
Metallography, American Society
for Testing and Materials.
Method for Tensile Strain-
Hardening Exponents (n-Values)
of Metallic Sheet Materials”, 2001
Annual Book of ASTM
Standards, Vol. 03.01, Metals –
Mechanical Testing; Elevated
and Low-Temperature Tests;
Metallography, American Society
for Testing and Materials.
Method for Vickers Hardness of
Metallic Materials”, 2001 Annual
03.01, Metals – Mechanical
Testing; Elevated and Low-

P0214.doc
Figures:
Figure 1: Typical forged longitudinal seam weld cross section showing uniform
weld geometry on the outside and inside surfaces. The sample was
removed from one end of a production mill coil of 0.625-in. OD x
0.065-in wall thickness(15.7-mm x 1.7-mm) tubing. Electrolytically
etched in a NaOH solution.
Figure 2: Typical microstructure of strip, electrolytically etched in a NaOH

solution, dark etching phase is ferrite.
Figure 3: Typical microstructure of strip splice weld (weld metal), electrolytically

etched in a NaOH solution, dark etching phase is ferrite.

P0214.doc
Figure 4: Typical microstructure of longitudinal seam weld (weld metal),

electrolytically etched in a NaOH solution, dark etching phase is
ferrite.
Figure 5: Typical microstructure of welded tubing base metal, electrolytically

Figure 6: Typical microstructure of orbital weld (weld metal), electrolytically


P0214.doc
300
290
Base Metal HAZ LSW HAZ Base Metal
280
270
Hardness (HV 0.5)
260
250
240
230
220
210
200
-0.25 -0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Position Relative to Weld Centerline (in)
Figure 7: Vickers hardness HV 0.5 test measurements at mid-thickness across longitudinal seam weld cross
sections.
300
290
Base Metal HAZ SSW HAZ Base Metal
280
270
Hardness (HV 0.5)
260
250
240
230
220
210
200
-0,3 -0,2 -0,1 0 0,1 0,2 0,3
Figure 8: Vickers hardness HV 0.5 test measurements at mid-thickness across strip splice weld cross sections.

P0214.doc
300
290
Base Metal HAZ OW HAZ Base Metal
280
270
Hardness (HV 0.5)
260
250
240
230
220
210
200
-0,3 -0,2 -0,1 0 0,1 0,2 0,3
Figure 9: Vickers hardness HV 0.5 test measurements at mid-thickness across orbital weld cross sections.
Figure 10: Stress range versus cycles to failure (SN) for rotational fatigue testing of alloy 19D tubing
samples from heat 301000 with only the longitudinal seam weld (LSW). The B-curve represents a
characteristic SN design curve for structures in sea-water with cathodic protection based upon NS
3472E.

P0214.doc
samples from heat 301000 with a strip splice weld (SSW) at the center. The B-curve represents a
3472E.
samples from heat 301000 with an orbital weld (OW) at the center. The B-curve represents a
3472E.

P0214.doc
samples from heat 301000. The –2SD limit curves are plotted for all three alloy 19D welds types:
samples with only the longitudinal seam weld (LSW), samples with a strip splice weld at the
center (SSW), and samples with an orbital weld at the center (OW). Upper (best) and lower
(worst) –2SD limit curves for a region of design SN curves for 2507 orbital welds are also plotted.
Tables:
Element Weight %
Spec. /
C Cr Mn Mo N Ni P S Si Cu
Heat No.
A 240 0.030 19.5 - 4.0 - 0.60 0.05 – 1.0 – 0.040 0.030 1.00 1.00
S32001 max. 21.5 6.0 max. 0.17 3.0 max. max. max. max.
391666 0.026 19.84 5.18 0.09 0.129 1.67 0.026 0.0013 0.38 0.35
301000 0.024 19.83 5.06 0.06 0.140 1.68 0.024 0.0011 0.41 0.32
201595 0.025 19.75 5.07 0.07 0.137 1.70 0.022 0.0005 0.40 0.23
201596 0.027 19.76 5.07 0.05 0.142 1.65 0.022 0.0008 0.38 0.23
410078 0.025 19.76 4.96 0.03 0.134 1.70 0.021 0.0009 0.37 0.29
201694 0.026 19.72 5.11 0.10 0.144 1.71 0.020 0.0008 0.39 0.29
310106 0.026 19.78 5.00 0.08 0.143 1.74 0.023 0.0007 0.38 0.24
410111 0.026 19.80 4.98 0.05 0.134 1.70 0.022 0.0007 0.39 0.26
410434 0.030 19.78 5.15 0.05 0.135 1.70 0.025 0.0005 0.40 0.30
310426 0.027 19.78 5.14 0.05 0.134 1.65 0.023 0.0007 0.38 0.33
410754 0.028 19.90 5.03 0.04 0.139 1.64 0.024 0.0007 0.39 0.21
Table 1: Chemical Composition of Alloy 19D Strip

P0214.doc
ASTM A 240 Element Weight % Limit

UNS No.
C Cr Mn Mo N Ni P S Si Cu
(Alloy)
S32750 0.030 24.0 – 1.2 3.0 – 0.24 – 6.0 – 0.035 0.020 0.8 0.5
(2507) max. 26.0 max. 5.0 0.32 8.0 max. max. max. max.
S32205 0.030 22.0 – 2.00 3.0 – 0.14 – 4.5 – 0.030 0.020 1.00 -
(2205) max. 23.0 max. 3.5 0.20 6.5 max. max. max.
S32001 0.030 19.5 - 4.0 - 0.60 0.05 – 1.0 - 0.040 0.030 1.00 1.00
(19D) max. 21.5 6.0 max. 0.17 3.0 max. max. max. max.
S31603 0.030 16.0 – 2.00 2.0 – 0.10 10.0 – 0.045 0.030 0.75 -
(316L) max. 18.0 max. 3.0 max. 14.0 max. max. max.
S30403 0.030 18.0 – 2.00 - 0.10 8.0 – 0.045 0.030 0.75 -
(304L) max. 20.0 max. max. 12.0 max. max max.
Table 2: Comparison of the Chemical Composition for Various Duplex and Austenitic Stainless Steel Alloys
UNS No. (Alloy) PRE Range

S32750 (2507) 37.74 to 47.62
S32205 (2205) 34.14 to 37.75
S31603 (316L) 22.60 to 29.50
S32001 (19D) 20.30 to 26.20
S30403 (304L) 18.00 to 21.60
Table 3: Comparison of the PRE Range for Various Duplex and Austenitic Stainless Steel Alloys
Heat No. UTSa (psi) 0.2 YSa (psi) E (%) Hardness

ASTM A 240 90,000 65,000 25 HRC 25
UNS S32001 min. min. min. max.
391666 115,300 87,400 38.3 HRB 99
301000 119,900 79,900 48.7 HRC 22

301000 119,800 81,800 46.0 HRC 22
301000 120,800 81,800 46.0 HRC 22
201595 113,600 84,000 42.7 HRC 20

201595 115,000 85,800 41.7 HRC 20
201595 113,800 83,900 41.4 HRC 19
201595 113,300 85,100 41.9 HRC 21
201596 115,000 79,100 45.4 HRC 22

201596 113,200 78,400 40.6 HRC 20
410078 113,800 79,600 41.8 HRC 20

410078 113,600 81,300 41.9 HRC 21
201694 115,000 83,000 41.9 HRC 21

201694 116,500 84,700 41.4 HRC 21
310106 115,600 78,400 43.9 HRC 21

310106 117,500 85,100 45.1 HRC 20
310106 115,000 81,900 41.8 HRC 21
410111 118,900 86,500 42.2 HRC 22

410111 115,600 83,400 41.2 HRC 21
410434 123,400 87,600 40.8 HRC 21

410434 116,600 82,100 41.0 HRC 21
310426 116,400 83,200 41.0 HRC 21
410754 120,900 92,400 38.8 HRC 22

410754 119,900 84,500 41.9 HRC 22
Notes
a. To convert from psi to MPa, multiply by 6.895 x 10-3.
Table 4: Tensile and Hardness Test Data for Alloy 19D Strip

P0214.doc
Property / Heat Treatment Proposed Requirement

Tensile Strength, min, ksi [MPa] 90 [620]
Yield Strength, min, ksi [MPa] 65 [450]
Elongation in 2 in., min, % 25
Hardness, max, HB 290
Hardness, max, HRC 30
Heat treatment temperature 1,800 – 1,950°F [982 – 1,066°C]
Quench Rapid cooling in air or water
Table 5: Tensile, Hardness and Heat Treatment Requirements for UNS S32001 (Alloy 19D) Recently Added to
ASTM A 789

P0214.doc
Heat No. / Outside Dia. Outside Dia. Wall Thickness Wall Thickness
Statistical Quantity Min. (in.) Max. (in.) Base Metal (in.) at Weld (in.)
ASTM A 789 Requirements 0.620–0.630 0.620–0.630 0.0585–0.0715 0.0585–0.0715
Heat 391666 (84 Mill Coils)
Average 0.6250 0.6265 0.0650 0.0654
±95% Confidence Interval 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001
Maximum 0.6260 0.6280 0.0675 0.0685
Minimum 0.6230 0.6250 0.0630 0.0630
Average 0.6243 0.6264 0.0658 0.0656
Maximum 0.6260 0.6280 0.0680 0.0682
Minimum 0.6230 0.6240 0.0635 0.0630
Average 0.6244 0.6264 0.0657 0.0651
Maximum 0.6260 0.6270 0.0674 0.0670
Minimum 0.6220 0.6235 0.0648 0.0630
Average 0.6242 0.6263 0.0656 0.0650
Maximum 0.6260 0.6280 0.0670 0.0675
Minimum 0.6220 0.6250 0.0640 0.0628
Average 0.6242 0.6263 0.0658 0.0655
Maximum 0.6270 0.6280 0.0670 0.0674
Minimum 0.6220 0.6250 0.0638 0.0635
Average 0.6238 0.6263 0.0655 0.0649
Maximum 0.6260 0.6280 0.0680 0.0685
Minimum 0.6240 0.6240 0.0630 0.0630
Average 0.6237 0.6264 0.0658 0.0652
Maximum 0.6250 0.6280 0.0672 0.0686
Minimum 0.6230 0.6250 0.0645 0.0635
Average 0.6244 0.6264 0.0657 0.0653
Maximum 0.6260 0.6290 0.0670 0.0676
Minimum 0.6230 0.6250 0.0638 0.0635
Average 0.6255 0.6273 0.0657 0.0654
Maximum 0.6270 0.6280 0.0680 0.0695
Minimum 0.6220 0.6240 0.0600 0.0600
Average 0.6252 0.6274 0.0657 0.0651
Maximum 0.6270 0.6280 0.0673 0.0670
Minimum 0.6240 0.6260 0.0640 0.0627
Average 0.6250 0.6274 0.0661 0.0654
Maximum 0.6260 0.6280 0.0670 0.0668
Minimum 0.6240 0.6260 0.0650 0.0635
To convert from inches to mm, multiply by 25.4.
Table 6: Dimensional Data for Alloy 19D Seam Welded Tubing from Production Mill Coils

P0214.doc
Outside Wall
Sample No. Orientation
Diameter (in.)a Thickness (in.)a
Variation allowed by 0.620 to 0.630 0.0585 to 0.0715
ASTM A 789 (±0.005-in.) (±10%)
LSW-10-114 Weld 0° 0.626 0.064
LSW-10-114 45° 0.626 0.067
LSW-10-114 90° 0.626 0.067
LSW-10-114 135° 0.625 0.065
LSW-10-114 180° 0.064
LSW-10-114 225° 0.065
LSW-10-114 270° 0.065
LSW-10-114 315° 0.067
Avg. 0.626 0.066
LSW-10-115 Weld 0° 0.626 0.066

LSW-10-115 45° 0.625 0.068
LSW-10-115 90° 0.626 0.065
LSW-10-115 135° 0.625 0.065
LSW-10-115 180° 0.064
LSW-10-115 225° 0.065
LSW-10-115 270° 0.066
LSW-10-115 315° 0.065
Avg. 0.626 0.066
LSW-10-116 Weld 0° 0.625 0.065

LSW-10-116 45° 0.625 0.065
LSW-10-116 90° 0.625 0.067
LSW-10-116 135° 0.625 0.066
LSW-10-116 180° 0.064
LSW-10-116 225° 0.064
LSW-10-116 270° 0.064
LSW-10-116 315° 0.066
Avg. 0.625 0.065
Notes
a. To convert from inches to mm, multiply by 25.4.
Table 7: Additional Detailed Dimensional Analysis of Alloy 19D Tubing Samples From Heat 301000

P0214.doc
Ra Ry Rz Rq
Sample No. Surfacea Orientation
(µ in.)b (µ in.)c (µ in.)d (µ in.)e
LSW-10-114 OD Weld 0° 14.7 129.5 104.2 18.9
LSW-10-114 OD 90° 13.2 132.3 81.2 17.9
LSW-10-114 OD 180° 3.9 32.7 24.9 5.1
LSW-10-114 OD 270° 22.7 258.7 152.6 30.9
OD Avg. 13.6 138.3 90.7 18.2
LSW-10-114 ID Weld 0° 42.2 258.3 222.2 52.3

LSW-10-114 ID 90° 9.8 94.1 73.1 12.7
LSW-10-114 ID 180° 49.6 304.3 268.6 63.2
LSW-10-114 ID 270° 14.1 118.9 93.1 18.0
ID Avg. 28.9 193.9 164.3 36.6
LSW-10-115 OD Weld 0° 24.9 177.2 139.1 31.2

LSW-10-115 OD 90° 7.1 204.7 80.5 12.8
LSW-10-115 OD 180° 5.4 65.0 41.7 7.6
LSW-10-115 OD 270° 12.3 150.4 120.0 18.3
OD Avg. 12.4 149.3 95.3 17.5
LSW-10-115 ID Weld 0° 38.0 303.5 219.1 49.0

LSW-10-115 ID 90° 12.7 98.8 86.1 15.9
LSW-10-115 ID 180° 49.3 252.4 218.6 60.2
LSW-10-115 ID 270° 11.5 87.4 74.4 14.6
ID Avg. 27.9 185.5 149.6 34.9
LSW-10-116 OD Weld 0° 17.8 113.8 96.5 22.0

LSW-10-116 OD 90° 24.4 258.3 187.8 36.8
LSW-10-116 OD 180° 9.4 129.1 81.3 14.1
LSW-10-116 OD 270° 12.0 157.1 103.1 16.2
OD Avg. 15.9 139.6 117.2 22.3
LSW-10-116 ID Weld 0° 21.1 163.0 138.2 26.7

LSW-10-116 ID 90° 14.4 127.2 101.9 18.3
LSW-10-116 ID 180° 11.4 74.8 63.9 13.8
LSW-10-116 ID 270° 10.7 116.9 79.1 13.5
ID Avg. 14.4 120.5 95.8 18.1
Notes
OD = outside surface; ID = inside surface.
Ra = arithmetic mean deviation of profile.
Ry = maximum height of the profile.
Rz = ten-point height of irregularities.
Rq = root-mean-square deviation of the profile.
To convert from inches to mm, multiply by 25.4.
Table 8: Surface Roughness Parameters for Alloy 19D Tubing Samples From Heat 301000

P0214.doc
Heat No. % Ferrite ± 95% CI % RA

Aima 45 to 50
Acceptable Rangea 35 to 60
391666 50.3 3.6 7.1
301000 46.8 4.0 8.5
201595 45.4 4.4 9.6
201596 48.3 3.9 8.1
410078 45.2 3.4 7.5
201694 51.7 4.6 8.9
310106 41.6 3.2 7.6
410111 51.4 3.2 6.1
410434 41.4 3.2 7.7
310426 44.4 4.1 9.2
410754 51.1 3.2 6.2
Notes
a. The requirements are based upon current subsea umbilical tubing specifications.
Table 9: Ferrite Point Count Data for Alloy 19D Strip
Heat No. /
% Ferrite ± 95% CI % RA
Region Evaluated
Aima 45 to 50
Heat 391666
Base metal 46.9 3.4 7.2
Weld metal 49.9 4.6 9.2
Heat 301000
Base metal 43.3 3.5 8.1
Weld metal 52.1 4.1 7.8
Heat 201595
Base metal 46.5 3.1 6.6
Weld metal 49.5 3.8 7.7
Heat 201596
Base metal 47.0 3.3 7.1
Weld metal 49.3 4.2 8.4
Heat 410078
Base metal 44.7 4.0 9.0
Weld metal 49.8 4.0 8.0
Heat 201694
Base metal 47.4 2.5 5.3
Weld metal 48.6 3.8 7.8
Heat 310106
Base metal 49.8 3.3 6.7
Weld metal 51.0 3.8 7.5
Heat 410111
Base metal 49.7 3.9 7.9
Weld metal 48.8 3.9 7.9
Heat 410434
Base metal 40.7 4.0 9.8
Weld metal 44.6 2.6 5.8
Heat 310426
Base metal 44.3 3.2 7.2
Weld metal 50.9 3.9 7.6
Heat 410754
Base metal 49.1 2.1 4.3
Weld metal 50.6 2.1 4.3
Notes
Table 10: Ferrite Point Count Data for Alloy 19D Longitudinal Seam Welds

P0214.doc
Heat No. /
% Ferrite ± 95% CI % RA
Region Evaluated
Aima 45 to 50
Heat 391666
Base metal 47.8 3.1 6.6
Weld metal 47.3 2.7 5.7
Heat 301000
Base metal 42.1 3.8 9.2
Weld metal 50.9 3.8 7.5
Heat 201595
Base metal 44.3 3.8 8.5
Weld metal 49.8 3.9 7.9
Heat 201596
Base metal 44.4 3.4 7.7
Weld metal 51.4 2.9 5.6
Heat 410078
Base metal 45.9 3.1 6.8
Weld metal 50.0 3.5 7.0
Heat 201694
Base metal 44.8 4.1 9.2
Weld metal 49.8 2.9 5.7
Heat 310106
Base metal 46.9 3.8 8.2
Weld metal 50.5 3.6 7.1
Heat 410111
Base metal 48.8 2.9 5.9
Weld metal 52.0 3.7 7.1
Heat 410434
Base metal 42.3 3.9 9.2
Weld metal 45.2 3.3 7.3
Heat 310426
Base metal 45.0 3.0 6.6
Weld metal 49.4 2.4 4.8
Heat 410754
Base metal 47.8 2.7 5.6
Weld metal 53.6 3.3 6.1
Notes
Table 11: Ferrite Point Count Data for Alloy 19D Strip Splice Welds

P0214.doc
Heat No. / % Ferrite

Region Evaluated Range ± 95% CIb % RAb
Aima 45 to 50
Heat 391666 (7 samples)
Base metal 43.3 – 49.6 5.6, 5.1 12.8, 10.2
Weld metal 41.1 – 48.6 3.3, 4.4 7.9, 9.0
Base metal 41.8 – 51.0 3.4, 3.5 8.1, 6.8
Weld metal 39.1 – 48.0 3.8, 3.6 9.8, 7.5
Base metal 41.4 – 46.4 5.3, 5.0 12.6, 10.8
Weld metal 44.1 – 50.6 3.4, 4.2 7.7, 8.3
Base metal 43.3 – 49.3 4.3, 3.7 10.0, 7.5
Weld metal 41.0 – 46.6 4.4, 4.9 10.6, 10.4
Base metal 42.2 – 48.7 4.8, 3.2 11.4, 6.6
Weld metal 39.0 – 48.9 3.7, 2.6 9.4, 5.3
Base metal 40.4 – 49.6 3.5, 4.6 8.8, 9.3
Weld metal 40.9 – 51.6 3.4, 4.9 8.3, 9.4
Base metal 42.8 – 48.9 3.4, 3.3 7.9, 6.8
Weld metal 38.9 – 48.1 3.1, 3.3 8.0, 6.9
Base metal 39.9 – 48.8 3.7, 3.5 9.4, 7.1
Weld metal 47.6 – 53.9 3.6, 3.9 7.6, 7.1
Base metal 44.3 – 49.3 3.0, 2.5 6.8, 5.1
Weld metal 43.7 – 50.4 2.4, 4.4 5.4, 8.7
Base metal 44.8 – 48.0 3.6, 2.9 8.0, 6.1
Weld metal 43.9 – 50.5 3.4, 2.8 7.8, 5.5
Base metal 44.3 – 47.3 2.1, 2.4 4.7, 5.0
Weld metal 47.2 – 47.6 3.3, 3.1 6.9, 6.5
Notes
b. Values corresponding to limits of % ferrite range.
Table 12: Ferrite Point Count Data for Alloy 19D Orbital Welds
Temperature Specific Heat

(°C) (J/g-K)
25 0.471
260 0.548
538 0.684
Table 13: Specific Heat Data For Alloy 19D Strip Samples from Heat 301000
Temperature Thermal Conductivity

(°C) (W/m-K)
25 15.9
260 18.9
538 22.9
Table 14: Thermal Conductivity Data for Alloy 19D Strip Samples from Heat 301000
Coefficient
Temperature
of Thermal Expansion
(°C)
(∆L/L/°C)
− 20 14.11 x 10-6
+ 20 14.42 x 10-6
+ 100 15.04 x 10-6
Table 15: Coefficient of Thermal Expansion Data for Alloy 19D Strip Samples from Heat 301000

P0214.doc
Test Modulus of
Sample No.
Temp. (°C) Elasticity (psi)a
LSW-10-108 − 20 30.2 x 106
LSW-10-109 − 20 30.3 x 106
LSW-10-106 + 21 29.1 x 106
LSW-10-107 + 21 31.3 x 106
LSW-10-110 + 100 28.5 x 106
LSW-10-111 + 100 31.9 x 106
Notes
a. Average of three tests.
Table 16: Modulus of Elasticity Data For Alloy 19D Tubing Samples from Heat 301000
304 / 316 /
Alloy / Property 19D 2205 2507
304L 316L
Density
7.94 8.03 7.77 7.85 7.80
(g/cm3)
Specific Heat
0.500 0.450 0.471 0.470 0.470
(J/g-K)
Thermal Conductivity
16.3 16.2 15.9 14.0 14.0
(W/m-K)
Coefficient
of Thermal Expansion 16.6 16.5 14.4 13.7 13.5
(∆L/L/°C) x10-6
Modulus of Elasticity
193 200 208b 200 200
(GPa)
Notes
a. Data reported are for a temperature of approximately 20°C.
b. Data based upon seam welded tubing samples.
Table 17: Comparison of Physical Properties of Alloy 19D With Various Stainless Steels
Heat No. UTSa,b (psi) YSa,b (psi) Eb (%)

100,000 80,000 25
Requirementsc
min. min. min.
391666 110,969 86,245 26.3
301000 112,705 85,166 24.2
201595 111,800 86,500 17.0
201596 112,050 85,200 15.4
410078 117,500 87,600 24.2
201694 113,900 85,800 20.5
310106 113,600 93,950 14.0
410111 113,250 92,350 14.3
410434 116,800 80,850 25.9
310426 114,150 92,400 13.8
410754 115,850 93,850 10.6
Notes
b. Average of two tests.
c. The requirements are based upon subsea umbilical tubing specifications in effect when the tubing was manufactured.
Table 18: Tensile Test Data for Alloy 19D Strip Splice Welds

P0214.doc
Heat / Statistical Quantity UTS (psi)a YS (psi)a E (%)

b 100,000 80,000 25
Requirements
min. min. min.
Heat 391666 (71 Samples)
Average 121,269 86,923 42.0
±95% Confidence Interval 779 1,053 0.7
Maximum 132,173 99,107 47.0
Minimum 113,793 80,000 31.0
Average 123,209 87,832 42.7
Maximum 126,956 97,391 47.0
Minimum 120,175 80,400 34.0
Average 123,081 91,076 41.1
±95% Confidence Interval 1,063 1,955 1.2
Maximum 128,800 97,413 44.0
Minimum 118,803 82,500 34.8
Average 125,260 86,473 41.6
Maximum 130,700 94,500 45.5
Minimum 121,551 80,400 38.0
Average 126,274 84,543 39.3
Maximum 129,900 92,500 44.2
Minimum 121,800 80,500 33.4
Average 123,425 85,631 40.4
Maximum 131,200 101,709 45.5
Minimum 118,900 80,600 35.6
Average 125,905 83,773 40.2
Maximum 130,100 89,000 43.8
Minimum 122,200 80,100 34.0
Average 125,262 83,981 39.2
±95% Confidence Interval 765 812 0.8
Maximum 129,100 89,900 43.3
Minimum 121,200 81,200 35.5
Average 126,871 84,354 40.3
Maximum 132,500 94,600 43.7
Minimum 122,000 80,200 34.2
Average 127,271 83,824 39.5
Maximum 132,100 94,300 44.6
Minimum 123,000 80,000 31.8
Heat 410754 4( Samples)
Average 125,600 84,500 40.2
Maximum 128,900 88,700 42.7
Minimum 123,100 80,700 38.3
Notes
b. The requirements are based upon subsea umbilical tubing specifications in effect when the tubing was manufactured.
Table 19: Tensile Test Data for Alloy 19D Seam Welded Tubing from Production Mill Coils

P0214.doc
Heat / Statistical Quantity UTS (psi)a YS (psi)a E (%)

b 100,000 80,000 25
Requirements
min. min. min.
Heat 391666 (4 Reels)
Average 110,346 88,168 19.0
Maximum 113,392 94,642 25.0
Minimum 108,695 84,347 13.0
Average 113,431 85,534 24.4
Maximum 116,100 94,782 31.0
Minimum 109,482 76,700 13.0
Average 111,709 89,287 22.0
Maximum 114,782 96,551 25.0
Minimum 107,758 83,333 19.0
Average 113,331 80,842 20.3
Maximum 116,700 94,736 25.8
Minimum 108,800 74,000 11.4
Average 115,823 79,885 24.8
Maximum 119,700 84,300 27.6
Minimum 110,400 72,200 21.1
Average 112,100 77,881 16.4
Maximum 115,400 83,200 26.1
Minimum 109,900 73,500 10.5
Average 113,667 82,183 21.5
Maximum 117,100 96,600 25.7
Minimum 110,200 74,600 13.0
Average 113,760 82,080 20.4
Maximum 121,700 92,700 25.5
Minimum 110,100 80,000 12.8
Average 114,983 82,592 19.7
Maximum 118,100 90,600 25.3
Minimum 112,200 80,100 14.8
Average 113,270 81,470 21.5
Maximum 116,500 85,200 25.2
Minimum 109,700 80,200 14.9
Average 113,850 83,100 22.8
Maximum 114,400 85,800 24.5
Minimum 113,300 80,400 21.0
Notes
Table 20: Tensile Test Data for Alloy 19D Orbital Welds from Production Reels

P0214.doc
Test UTS 0.2% YS 1% YS E

Specification / Sample Temp. (°C) (psi) (psi) (psi) (%)
Ambient 100,000 80,000 25
Requirementsa (+ 22) min. min. None min.
Long. Seam Welds
LSW-10-100 − 20 146,100 93,800 104,400 38.1
LSW-10-101 − 20 144,900 93,900 103,900 38.3
LSW-10-102 + 22 120,900 85,000 93,600 40.6
LSW-10-103 + 22 120,300 84,200 93,500 40.4
LSW-10-104 + 100 103,300 74,100 81,400 32.6
LSW-10-105 + 100 100,900 72,700 79,500 31.7
Strip Splice Welds
SSW-7-110 − 20 131,700 93,900 103,500 23.6
SSW-7-127 − 20 132,300 94,200 104,100 24.7
SSW-7-132 + 22 116,800 85,400 95,400 25.9
SSW-7-134 + 22 112,800 84,400 93,900 22.8
SSW-7-135 + 100 96,100 73,400 80,700 14.6
SSW-7-136 + 100 Sample Destroyed
Orbital Welds
OW-82-102 − 20 108,600 83,000 98,400 9.2
OW-82-105 − 20 129,500 82,700 96,800 25.2
OW-82-127 + 22 110,200 77,500 89,900 19.9
OW-82-128 + 22 107,700 77,600 89,400 16.9
OW-82-130 + 100 91,400 65,200 75,900 12.2
OW-82-134 + 100 92,700 66,300 76,900 12.6
Notes
a. Based upon ambient temperature requirements of subsea umbilical tubing specifications in effect when the tubing was
manufactured.
Table 21: Tensile Test Data for Alloy 19D Longitudinal Seam, Strip Splice and Orbital Weld Samples From Heat 301000
Manufacturing Stage UTSa (psi) YSa (psi) E (%)

b 100,000 80,000 25
Requirements
min. min. min.
Stripc 116,033 81,800 43.6
Tubing, after mill
122,400 82,800 41.1
eddy currentd
Average of 22 samples
125,905 83,773 40.2
after mill coiler
Tubing, after orbital
125,300 82,700 41.5
weld straightnerd
Tubing, after
125,300 81,600 40.8
final reelingd
Notes
c. As reported by AK Steel.
d. Data are from one sample.
Table 22: Comparison of Tensile Test Data for Alloy 19D Tubing Samples from Heat 310106 At Various Stages in the Gibson
Tube Manufacturing Process
Heat No. /
Coil Identification / UTSa (psi) YSa (psi) E (%)
Manufacturing Stage
100,000 80,000 25
Requirementsb
min. min. min.
Average of 20 samples after
123,081 91,076 41.1
mill coiler at Gibson Tube
SG-382, Mill Coil 66 After
126,500 92,300 38.9
FAT at SeaCATc
Notes
c. Average of two tests.
Table 23: Comparison of Tensile Test Data for Alloy 19D Tubing Samples from Heat 201595 Representing Manufacturing
Stages at Gibson Tube and SeaCAT

P0214.doc
Hardness
Heat / Statistical Quantity
(HRC)
Requirementsa 25 max.
Heat 391666 (84 Mill Coils )
Average 24.0
±95% Confidence Interval 0.2
Maximum 27.4
Minimum 20.0
Average 24.4
Maximum 28.4
Minimum 21.4
Average 24.6
Maximum 27.7
Minimum 20.2
Average 24.8
Maximum 28.2
Minimum 20.0
Average 24.0
Maximum 26.5
Minimum 21.2
Average 24.4
Maximum 27.9
Minimum 19.4
Average 24.0
Maximum 26.3
Minimum 21.8
Average 23.7
Maximum 25.0
Minimum 21.6
Average 23.0
Maximum 28.8
Minimum 18.2
Average 21.9
Maximum 24.8
Minimum 18.8
Average 22.1
Maximum 24.0
Minimum 20.0
Notes
a. The requirements are based upon subsea umbilical tubing specifications in effect when the tubing was manufactured.
Table 24: Hardness Test Data for Alloy 19D Seam Welded Tubing from Production Mill Coils

P0214.doc
Average Minimum Maximum

Weld Type / Test
HV 10 HV 10 HV 10
Sample Number Locationa
Hardnessb Hardnessb Hardnessb
Long. Seam Weld
LSW-10-112 BM 258 253 261
LSW-10-112 LSW 245 242 251
LSW-10-113 BM 247 243 251
LSW-10-113 LSW 253 251 254
Strip Splice Weld
SSW-7-137 SSW 246 242 252
SSW-7-138 SSW 243 237 249
Orbital Weld
OW-82-137 OW 231 211 249
OW-82-138 OW 233 227 237
Notes
a. Test location key: BM = base metal, LSW = longitudinal seam weld metal, SSW = strip splice weld metal, OW = orbital
weld metal.
b. Five Vickers hardness test measurements were made on the outside surface using a Vickers test force HV 10.
Table 25: Vickers Hardness Test Measurements For Alloy 19D Tubing Samples from Heat 301000
Approximate
LSW-10-112 LSW-10-113
Test Arc Distance
HV 0.5 HV 0.5
Locationa From Weld
Hardnessb Hardnessb
Centerline (in.)
BM 0.25 268 260
BM 0.23 258 262
BM 0.21 260 258
BM 0.19 257 258
BM 0.17 258 260
BM 0.15 254 252
BM 0.13 264 252
BM 0.11 263 253
HAZ 0.09 254 261
LSW 0.07 247 253
LSW 0.05 246 244
LSW 0.03 228 236
LSW 0.01 252 249
LSW 0.01 245 236
LSW 0.03 247 233
LSW 0.05 252 248
LSW 0.07 240 238
HAZ 0.09 248 256
BM 0.11 264 265
BM 0.13 251 260
BM 0.15 257 254
BM 0.17 264 259
BM 0.19 259 263
BM 0.21 265 264
BM 0.23 267 265
BM 0.25 255 254
Notes
a. Test location key: BM = base metal, HAZ = heat affected zone, LSW = longitudinal seam weld metal.
b. Vickers hardness test measurements were made on a weld cross section at approximately the mid-thickness using a
Vickers test force HV 0.5. The measurements were spaced at increments of 0.020-in. (0.5 mm).
Table 26: Vickers Hardness Test Measurements for Alloy 19D Longitudinal Seam Weld Cross Sections from Heat 301000

P0214.doc
Distance SSW-7-137 SSW-7-138

Test
From Weld HV 0.5 HV 0.5
Locationa
Centerline (in.) Hardnessb Hardnessb
BM 0.25 266 265
BM 0.23 271 276
BM 0.21 270 268
BM 0.19 267 271
BM 0.17 267 266
BM 0.15 266 270
BM 0.13 260 269
BM 0.11 261 262
HAZ 0.09 264 267
SSW 0.07 248 249
SSW 0.05 254 241
SSW 0.03 246 249
SSW 0.01 260 255
SSW 0.01 249 236
SSW 0.03 248 261
SSW 0.05 245 268
SSW 0.07 245 245
HAZ 0.09 260 254
BM 0.11 266 259
BM 0.13 260 265
BM 0.15 263 262
BM 0.17 260 261
BM 0.19 255 265
BM 0.21 263 262
BM 0.23 263 260
BM 0.25 263 271
Notes
a. Test location key: BM = base metal, HAZ = heat affected zone, SSW = strip splice weld metal.
Table 27: Vickers Hardness Test Measurements for Alloy 19D Strip Splice Weld Cross Sections from Heat 301000

P0214.doc
Distance OW-82-137 OW-82-138

Test
From Weld HV 0.5 HV 0.5
Locationa
Centerline (in.) Hardnessb Hardnessb
BM 0.25 262 261
BM 0.23 263 260
BM 0.21 260 251
BM 0.19 262 252
BM 0.17 264 253
BM 0.15 267 252
BM 0.13 262 256
BM 0.11 252 249
HAZ 0.09 250 237
OW 0.07 218 232
OW 0.05 213 232
OW 0.03 227 223
OW 0.01 228 224
OW 0.01 227 228
OW 0.03 222 234
OW 0.05 235 228
OW 0.07 228 217
HAZ 0.09 251 240
BM 0.11 253 256
BM 0.13 255 260
BM 0.15 255 260
BM 0.17 252 252
BM 0.19 251 249
BM 0.21 248 244
BM 0.23 253 254
BM 0.25 248 253
Notes
a. Test location key: BM = base metal, HAZ = heat affected zone, OW = orbital weld metal.
Table 28: Vickers Hardness Test Measurements for Alloy 19D Orbital Weld Cross Sections from Heat 301000
ASTM Specification / Grade UTSa, min. YSa, min. Hardness,

E, min. (%)
(UNS Designation)) (psi) (psi) Max.
A 789 / 2507 (S32750) 116,000 80,000 15 HRC 32
A 789 / 2205 (S32205) 95,000 70,000 25 HRC 30.5
A 789 / 2205 (S31803) 90,000 65,000 25 HRC 30.5
A 789 / 19D (S32001) 90,000 65,000 25 HRC 30
Alloy 19D subsea umbilical tubingb 100,000 70,000 10 HRC 30
A 249 / 316L (S31603) 70,000 25,000 35 HRB 90
A 249 / 304L (S30403) 70,000 25,000 35 HRB 90
Notes
b. Recommended design requirements for subsea umbilical tubing based upon the limiting values of the orbital weld.
Table 29: Comparison of Tensile and Hardness Requirements for Various Duplex and Austenitic Stainless Steel Welded
Tubing Specifications

P0214.doc
Test 1 Test 2
Test 1 Test 2
Heat / Burst Burst
Failure Failure
Sample Pressurea Pressurea
Locationb Locationb
(psi) (psi)
Heat 391666
Strip splice weld 26,000 SSW 26,000 SSW
Longitudinal seam weld 26,500 LSW 26,000 LSW
Orbital weld 26,000 LSW 26,500 LSW
Heat 301000
Strip splice weld 26,500 LSW 26,000 LSW
Orbital weld 26,500 OW 26,500 OW
Heat 201595
Heat 201596
Strip splice weld 25,610 LSW 25,860 LSW
Orbital weld 27,830 OW 25,670 Fitting
Heat 410078
Orbital weld 27,500 OW 27,470 LSW
Heat 201694
Heat 310106
Heat 410111
Heat 410434
Longitudinal seam weld 25,540 BM 25,620 LSW
Orbital weld 25,410 OW 25,590 LSW
Heat 310426
Strip splice weld 27,320 SSW 27,480 LSW
Heat 410754
Notes
b. Key to failure location: SSW = strip splice weld, LSW = longitudinal seam weld, OW= orbital weld, Fitting = failure or
disengagement of fitting at indicated pressure.
Table 30: Burst Test Data for Alloy 19D Tubing

Seam Welded Lean Duplex Stainless Steel Tubing

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Seam Welded Lean Duplex Stainless Steel Tubing

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

P0214.

Experience manufacturing alloy 19D (UNS S32001)

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 1

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 2

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 3

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 4

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 5

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 6

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 7

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 8

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 9

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 10

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 11

Figure 2: Typical microstructure of strip, electrolytically etched in a NaOH

Figure 3: Typical microstructure of strip splice weld (weld metal), electrolytically

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 12

Figure 4: Typical microstructure of longitudinal seam weld (weld metal),

Figure 5: Typical microstructure of welded tubing base metal, electrolytically

Figure 6: Typical microstructure of orbital weld (weld metal), electrolytically

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 13

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 14

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 15

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 16

Table 1: Chemical Composition of Alloy 19D Strip

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 17

ASTM A 240 Element Weight % Limit

UNS No. (Alloy) PRE Range

Heat No. UTSa (psi) 0.2 YSa (psi) E (%) Hardness

301000 119,900 79,900 48.7 HRC 22

201595 113,600 84,000 42.7 HRC 20

201596 115,000 79,100 45.4 HRC 22

410078 113,800 79,600 41.8 HRC 20

201694 115,000 83,000 41.9 HRC 21

310106 115,600 78,400 43.9 HRC 21

410111 118,900 86,500 42.2 HRC 22

410434 123,400 87,600 40.8 HRC 21

310426 116,400 83,200 41.0 HRC 21

410754 120,900 92,400 38.8 HRC 22

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 18

Property / Heat Treatment Proposed Requirement

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 19

To convert from inches to mm, multiply by 25.4.

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 20

LSW-10-115 Weld 0° 0.626 0.066

LSW-10-116 Weld 0° 0.625 0.065

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 21

LSW-10-114 ID Weld 0° 42.2 258.3 222.2 52.3

LSW-10-115 OD Weld 0° 24.9 177.2 139.1 31.2

LSW-10-115 ID Weld 0° 38.0 303.5 219.1 49.0

LSW-10-116 OD Weld 0° 17.8 113.8 96.5 22.0

LSW-10-116 ID Weld 0° 21.1 163.0 138.2 26.7

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 22

Heat No. % Ferrite ± 95% CI % RA

Table 9: Ferrite Point Count Data for Alloy 19D Strip

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 23

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 24

Heat No. / % Ferrite

Temperature Specific Heat

Temperature Thermal Conductivity

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 25

Heat No. UTSa,b (psi) YSa,b (psi) Eb (%)

Stainless Steel World©2001 KCI Publishing BV 26

Heat / Statistical Quantity UTS (psi)a YS (psi)a E (%)