GUIDELINES FOR SPECIFICATION, WELDING AND INSPECTION OF STAINLESS ALLOY PIPING

Craig Reid, P.Eng.

Bacon Donaldson Consulting Engineers
Richmond, B.C., Canada V7A 4V4

ABSTRACT
____________________________________________________________________________________________

The Corrosion & Materials Engineering Committee (C&ME) of the Tappi Engineering Division has developed two
technical information papers (TIPS) dealing with stainless alloy piping. The first, TIP 0402-24 "Guide to the use of
stainless steel pipe specifications" was issued in late 1998. The second, TIP 0402-26 "Guidelines for welding and
inspection of stainless alloy piping" was issued in early 1999. Both of these TIPS were sponsored by the Metals
Subcommittee of C&ME to provide guidance to mill engineers involved in ordering and installation of stainless
alloy (stainless steel and nickel base alloys) piping for a range of services including paper machine stock lines,
bleach plant, and pressure piping throughout the mill. They should prove useful in developing specifications and
evaluating proposals. This paper reviews the two TIPS.
____________________________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION

In the Metals Subcommittee open forum at the 1991 Tappi Engineering Conference, a discussion was held on the
quality of field welded circumferential joints in paper machine stock line piping and TMP pressure piping, made
with flux protection of the weld roots instead of root purging. It was reported that fatigue cracking had occurred in
several circumferential butt welds after short service. Examination of cross sections showed the cracking had
initiated at severe lack of penetration (Figure 1). It was decided that a Technical Information Paper (TIP) on
welding and inspection of stainless steel piping would be useful to provide background for mill engineers involved
with the installation and maintenance of stainless steel pipe in pulp and paper mill services. The primary focus was to
be on manual circumferential butt welds made during shop spooling and field erection of stainless steel pipelines.
However, it became apparent that information on the specification of the pipe itself was also desirable and that nickel
base alloys as well as stainless steels should be included. Two task groups were initiated:

• CA 910402.04 Specification of stainless alloy piping

• CA 920402.03 Fabrication and inspection of stainless alloy piping
These Task Groups completed their assignments in 1998 and 1999 respectively with the issue of:
• TIP 0402-24 Guide to the use of stainless steel pipe specification
• TIP 0402- 26 Guidelines for welding and inspection of stainless alloy piping
The two new TIPs are not intended to serve as specifications, but to provide background information for those
preparing purchase inquiries and specifications for stainless alloy piping systems, and for evaluating proposals for
the installation of such systems. The TIPs could be considered "awareness" documents to help the mill engineer ask
the right questions. As such, they should be used in conjunction with "Recommended specifications for stainless steel
piping, fittings and accessories for the pulp and paper industry”, 3rd edition 1, issued in 1986 by the M&ME
Committee.
Both TIPS assume material selection suitable for the intended service has already been made. In some cases, they
do provide examples of industry practice.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Codes and Standards

ANSI/ASME B31.3 “ Process Piping”2 can be applied to pulp and paper industry stainless alloy piping. This code
sets minimum requirements for materials, design, fabrication, and inspection of process pressure piping in a range of
alloys and non metals.

B31.3 is intended to cover process piping including steam and process chemicals, where pressure is greater than 103
kPa (15 psig) regardless of temperature. It may be mandatory in some jurisdictions or it may be referred to in
specifications for stainless alloy piping. Simplistic specification statements like “fabrication and inspection shall
conform to the ASME Code (ANSI/ASME B31.3)” should be avoided, because confusion over specific requirements
can arise. For example, inspection requirements and acceptance criteria in B31.3 depend on the owner’s designation
of the fluid service category involved. These are discussed in a later section of this paper.

Alloy Selection

The stainless alloy pipe, fittings, and weld filler should be selected to provide an adequate margin of safety against
general and localized corrosion. Information on corrosion concerns and alloy selection is available in references 3 -5.

Depending on the stainless alloy involved, the corrosion resistance of a weld and the adjacent base metal can be
reduced in relation to the unwelded base metal:6,7
•
the corrosion resistance of the weld filler metal may be reduced by microsegregation of molybdenum and other
alloying elements during solidification of the filler.8
•
the corrosion resistance of stainless steel weld filler metal to inhibited hydrochloric acid cleaning solutions can
be reduced by the formation of ferrite networks. The ferrite phase is corroded preferentially by hydrochloric
acid.9,10
•
the corrosion resistance of the heat affected zone in the base metal can be reduced by the precipitation of
undesirable phases or, when welding the 6% molybdenum and similar highly alloyed austenitic stainless steels,
by the formation of an unmixed zone where the base metal is melted, but not mixed, with the weld filler.8, 11
•
the corrosion resistance of the base metal may be reduced by formation of surface oxide scale as a result of
welding heat and inadequate protection of the weld root from oxidation (heat tint).12-14

Weld Filler Metal

To address weld metal microsegregation, a more highly alloyed (overmatching) filler metal may be used for some
services. Overmatching filler metal is most often required in acidic or near neutral oxidizing chloride environments,
in which the resistance to localized corrosion of the weld metal must at least match that of the wrought base metal.
For example, nickel-chromium-molybdenum (nickel based) filler is commonly used for welding 6% molybdenum
austenitic stainless steels.8 Overmatching filler is generally not required in kraft liquor service or in paper machine
white water service.

Where an overmatching filler metal is used, it may be necessary to limit how much the filler metal is diluted by the
base metal to be sure the intended overmatching is achieved. With butted joints, or joints with narrow root gaps, so
little filler can be added that the goal of overmatching is not achieved. For the 6% molybdenum austenitic stainless
steels, it important to ensure a sufficient root gap so that the weld metal will be well mixed with the base metal in the
root bead. It is also possible to use consumable inserts for root welding.11

Table I shows some commonly used stainless alloys and weld fillers with their American Welding Society (AWS)
designations. The prefix E denotes stick electrode for shielded metal arc welding (SMAW) or flux cored electrode
for flux cored arc welding (FCAW). The prefix ER denotes bare metal rod for gas metal arc welding (GMAW) or
gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW.
Table I. Weld filler metals for stainless alloys
Alloy “Matching ” filler metal Overmatching filler metal
304L austenitic stainless steel AWS E or ER308L not generally used
316L austenitic stainless steel AWS E or ER316L 317L is sometimes used
316L with 2.5% Mo 317L
317L austenitic stainless steel AWS E or ER 317L 904L is sometimes used
Alloy 20 AWS E or ER320
904L AWS E or ER385 AWS E or ERNiCrMo-3
6% molybdenum austenitic stainless matching filler not generally AWS E or ERNiCrMo-3
steels recommended or available
high nitrogen, high molybdenum matching filler not generally appropriate fillers are available from alloy
superaustenitic stainless steels recommended or available suppliers
2304 duplex stainless steel matching fillers may be available from AWS E or ER2209
some alloy suppliers
2205 duplex stainless steel AWS E or ER2209 appropriate fillers are available - consult
alloy suppliers
2505 and 2507 type duplex stainless AWS E or ER2553 or AWS E or ERNiCrMo-3 or as
steels matching fillers available from alloy recommended by alloy suppliers
suppliers
nickel base alloys consult alloy supper for appropriate fillers

Weld Heat Affected Zone (HAZ)

The formation of phases or structures that can reduce the corrosion resistance of the base metal heat affected zone
depends on alloy chemistry and welding procedure . For austenitic stainless steels and nickel base alloys, heat input
should be minimized. For duplex stainless steels, the heat input should be controlled within an optimum range .15,16

Surface Oxides

The negative effects of weld-related oxide scales and heat tint are best eliminated by preventing their formation
through adequate inert gas purging of the weld root. Where oxide scales and heat tint form they can be removed by
pickling with pastes or fluids containing nitric and hydrofluoric acids, or by other surface cleaning methods including
abrasive blasting and sanding. Acid pickling usually provides the best results but is seldom practical for field welds
because of access, safety, and environmental considerations. Hand wire brushing does not remove heat tint. Power
wire brushing appears to, but in fact only smears it.

Requirements for prevention and/or removal of oxide scale and heat tint should be based on an assessment of the
costs and benefits in a given application. For example, heat tint is not a concern in alkaline liquor service.

Weld Quality

Welds in stainless alloy piping should, in general, meet the quality requirements of ANSI/ASME B31.3. Special or
supplementary requirements may be warranted for some service conditions depending on:
• corrosivity
• loading conditions - e.g. vibration, hammer, stock stick-slip phenomena, etc. ANSI/ASME B31.3 provides
guidance on load considerations.
• special surface finish requirements - e.g. headbox approach piping

Accordingly it is difficult to generalize about acceptable levels of weld imperfections, which may include:
• cracking
may grow easily by fatigue, not acceptable in ASME pressure piping codes
• incomplete root penetration
stress raiser for crack initiation
 site for fiber/deposit build up which could cause crevice corrosion or release in
clumps causing process problems (e.g. headbox approach piping)
• lack of fusion (embedded)
stress raiser for crack initiation
• porosity, slag (if aligned may be interpreted as a linear defect by some codes)
if embedded are stress raisers
if exposed on the process side are stress raisers and sites possible sites for
corrosion
• poor root profile (excessive reinforcement, steep merging angle to base metal)
stress raiser for crack initiation
site for fiber hang up
• irregular oxidized root
stress raiser for crack initiation
site for fiber/deposit build up
site for corrosion in some services

GUIDE TO THE USE OF STAINLESS STEEL PIPE SPECIFICATIONS

This TIP summarizes ASTM/ASME specifications commonly used for stainless steel pipe. Nickel base alloys were
not included. The TIP discusses general considerations in the specification of stainless steel pipe and presents three
summary tables based on the method of manufacture of the pipe, i.e. centrifugally cast, seamless, and welded.
The tables in the TIP compare specification requirements which govern the:
• corrosion resistance of the pipe - filler metal, heat treatment
• dimensional tolerances of the pipe
• nondestructive testing performed on the pipe - hydrotest (HT) and optional or supplementary tests that may be
specified, including corrosion tests.
The corrosion resistance can be affected by the filler metal (if any) used for the longitudinal weld in the pipe, and by
the heat treatment (if any) and cleaning given the pipe after welding. Surface finish can influence both corrosion
resistance, and also the performance of the pipe in special applications like paper machine head box approach piping.
Surface finishes are generally better with cold worked products.
Dimensional tolerances can influence the field fit up required during shop and field welding. ASTM A530 “Standard
specification for general requirements for specialized carbon and alloy steel pipe” sets basic dimensional
requirements but the specific standard should also be checked for more restrictive requirements on wall thickness,
outside diameter and ovality. A530 governs straightness through two paragraphs:
14.1 the finished pipe shall be reasonably straight
14.2 for metal arc welded pipe the maximum deviation from a 3 m (10 foot) straightedge placed so that
both ends are in contact with the pipe shall be 3.2 mm (1/8 inch). This is pro-rated for lengths shorter
than 3m.
The nondestructive testing required for the pipe should be considered on the basis of cost versus perceived benefits.
The TIP states that requirements beyond industry standard levels will generally increase costs and may restrict timely
availability, and thus should be considered in terms of the potential benefits they return. Three categories suggested
for consideration in the TIP are listed below. Others categories are possible, including safety and code
considerations.
• High cost associated with lost production - increased costs associated with additional nondestructive
examination(s) may be justified to offset the potential risk of lost production
• Significant cost for routine maintenance - this condition could indicate a problem such as poor alloy choice for
the actual service, poor pipe manufacture with insufficient inspection, or improper installation. Consideration of
alternative manufacturing methods of inspections may be warranted.
• Tolerable cost for maintenance with low risk - pipe purchased to one of the basic specifications will likely be
adequate.
The welded pipe table in the TIP has been adapted as Table II of this paper to list the current ASTM specifications
for welded austenitic stainless steel pipe (which is commonly used in pulping, bleaching, and paper machine
applications). The welded pipe table in the TIP also includes duplex , ferritic, and martensitic stainless steel pipe.
Inspection of the tables in the TIP should be the first step in identifying and specifying the requirements judged
necessary for stainless steel pipe to offer the expected service performance. Once the appropriate specification(s)
have been identified, the current issue(s) should be obtained and reviewed before they are referenced in contract
documents or purchase orders. The titles of ASTM specifications are keyword searchable on the ASTM website at
www.astm.org. This is a good way to determine the current issue of a specification, and to search for other relevant
specifications. Individual ASTM specifications can be purchased on the website and many are available for
downloading or transmission by facsimile.
The ASTM specifications for stainless steel pipe each include an "Ordering Information" section, which is intended
to guide the user through the choices embedded in these specifications. The ordering information can also be
supplemented by additional requirements identified by the purchaser in the purchase order. Ordering pipe by
referring simply to the ASTM specification and the alloy type leaves options open to the pipe supplier, which can
affect the suitability of the ordered pipe for the intended service.

Example Use of the TIP

Suppose thin wall (gauge), large diameter, 6% molybdenum or equivalent austenitic stainless steel pipe is required
for a chlorine dioxide bleaching stage. The circumferential butt joints will be made with the nickel base filler, AWS
ENiCrMo3. An “overmatching” filler metal is required to ensure the welded joints match the corrosion resistance of
the pipe base metal (see later section). Some percentage of the circumferential butt welds will be inspected by
radiography according to the provisions of ANSI/ASME B31.3 "Process piping ".2
Seamless thin wall pipe is generally not available and review of Table II indicates the basic purchase options are:
• pipe welded without filler (autogenous welding) followed by a solution annealing heat treatment - A312, A813,
A409
• pipe welded with filler, without subsequent solution annealing (as-welded) - A358, A409, A778
To ensure competitive pricing, it is planned to ask for quotations in both solution annealed and as-welded pipe.
However, pipe supplied as-welded should be made with AWS ENiCrMo-3 filler for the longitudinal welds so the
specification used must allow for this. It is also desired that longitudinal welds in both annealed and as-welded pipe
be capable of passing radiographic inspection, since portions of the longitudinal welds in pipe or fillings will likely
be radiographed when the circumferential butt joints are radiographed. In fact, ANSI/ASME B31.3 paragraph
341.4.1(b) requires that radiographs of circumferential joints maximize coverage of the intersections with
longitudinal joints - at least 38 mm (1 ½”) of the longitudinal joint is to be examined. Moreover, the acceptance
criteria for longitudinal welds in ANSI/ASME B31.3 are more stringent than those for circumferential welds for
example incomplete penetration, undercutting, and surface porosity or exposed slag are not acceptable while for
circumferential welds, some degree of each is acceptable. Inspection of Table II however, shows that unless
otherwise specified pipe is only subjected to a hydrostatic test. Such pipe generally does pass radiography but there
is the chance that rejectable longitudinal welds may be found on radiography of circumferential welds. For example,
Figure 2 shows severe defects in one of the longitudinal welds of a 24” diameter 90° elbow. The defects were first
discovered during radiography of the circumferential butt welds. This led to 100% radiography of the fittings which
resulted in major field repairs. Thus the engineer must make a judgment whether to specify radiography of pipe (and
fittings) or to make a field repair, should rejectable welds be found during installation. The judgment may depend on
whether codes like ANSI/ASME B31.3 govern the piping system.
Review of A778 indicates the 6% molybdenum austenitic stainless steels are not included so this specification is
dropped from consideration.
For autogenously welded pipe A312, A409, and A 813 appear to be equivalent from Table II except for a difference
in OD tolerance. All three specifications require solution annealing and allow radiographic testing (RT) as a
supplementary requirement. Review of the specifications is needed to determine the requirements for radiography,
which are generally left to agreement between the pipe manufacture and the purchaser.
A409 allows filler metal to be used in welding, but this would be unlikely as matching filler is not generally
available for the 6% molybdenum grades, and there is no point in using ENiCrMo-3 filler if the pipe is to be solution
annealed.
For as welded pipe, A358 and A409 both require ENiCrMo-3 filler in 6% molybdenum pipe. As-welded delivery is
optional for A358 so should be stated explicitly in the inquiry and purchase order to avoid confusion. Both the use of
filler and as-welded delivery are optional for A409 pipe. Thus the inquiry and purchase order should state explicitly
that AWS ENiCrMo-3 filler metal be used and the pipe be supplied as welded. It would also be prudent to require
positive materials identification (PMI) of the pipe and weld filler with an appropriate minimum molybdenum
requirement for the weld filler. Longitudinal welds in pipe are generally made by automatic electric arc processes
and so little weld filler can be used that the welds approach the composition of welds made without filler. Such
“near autogenous” welds would be prone to pitting corrosion in chlorine dioxide service. This chemistry requirement
need not necessarily increase the cost of as-welded pipe if it is clearly stated at the inquiry stage.
A358 allows for radiography but reference to Table II show the class must be specified - class 2 does not require
radiography, class 5 requires spot radiography, and classes 1,3, and 4 require 100% radiography of the weld. A409
allows radiography as a supplementary requirement but, as noted previously, leaves the requirements up to
agreement between the manufacturer and purchaser.
A358 has tighter tolerances than A409 for OD, wall thickness, and ovality so may be more expensive. However, it
will also be easier to fit up for welding, and lower welding and fit up costs might offset a higher first cost for the
pipe itself. Straightness is governed by ASTM 530
When as-welded pipe is ordered, it is also important to address the surface finish. A409 states the pipe is to be free
of scale and contaminating iron particles, but does not state the means of surface finishing. Pickling, or blasting are
mentioned as possibilities. In the case of chlorine dioxide service, 6% molybdenum stainless steel pipe would
usually be ordered pickled and passivated. The effects of surface finish are discussed in more detail in a later
section. There may be little gain in requiring pickling and passivation of the pipe if the circumferential weld seams
are made to a lower quality standard.
The specification of 304L, 316L, or 317L austenitic stainless steel pipe involves similar considerations. Generally
as-welded pipe possesses adequate corrosion resistance if the base alloy appropriate for the service has been
selected. Overmatching filler is generally not needed.

FITTINGS
TIP 0402-24 does not address fittings and review of the ASTM specifications shows they are different enough to
warrant separate consideration. Table III lists ASTM specifications for fittings.
Table III. ASTM standard specifications for stainless steel fittings
A182-96 Forged or rolled alloy-steel pipe flanges, forged fittings, and valves and parts for high-temperature
service.
A403-98 Wrought austenitic stainless steel piping fittings
A774-98 As-welded wrought austenitic stainless steel fittings for general corrosive service at low and
moderate temperatures
A815-98a Wrought ferritic, ferritic/austenitic, and martensitic stainless steel piping fittings
For example, all A403 fittings are heat treated and are supplied to two basic classes: CR which does not require
nondestructive testing and WR which does. WR fittings are further subdivided as:

• WP-W 100% radiography of all welds made with the addition of filler metal, but ultrasonic testing may be
substituted for welds made by the fitting manufacturer
• WP-WX 100% radiography of all welds
• WP-WU 100% ultrasonic testing of all welds

A778 requires only visual examination. Hydrostatic testing and radiography are not required and are not included
as supplementary requirements. It is stated that welds shall be full penetration with or without the addition of filler
metal.
ANSI/ASME B31.3 does not include as-welded pipe and fittings which would thus be considered as unlisted
components per paragraph 302.2.3, which states that unlisted components which conform to a published
specification or standard may be used provided “the designer shall be satisfied that composition, mechanical
properties, method of manufacture, and quality control are comparable to the corresponding characteristics of listed
components”. All longitudinal welds in unlisted components must be 100% visually inspected and it is also
necessary to apply the radiography requirement for the appropriate service of B31.3. B31.3 service categories and
their radiography requirements are summarized in a later section of this paper. It is apparent that A774 fittings might
require radiography if used in a piping system covered by ASNI/ASME B31.3. It should be noted that ANSI/ASME
B31.3 does not allow ultrasonic testing to be substituted for radiography to attain weld joint quality factors for
longitudinal welds in fitting or pipe (B31.3 Interpretations 11.05 and 11.20 respectively). In view of the potential
complications, it might be wiser to purchase A403 fittings to avoid the possibility of rejectable fittings being
discovered during field radiography of circumferential butt joints.

GUIDELINES FOR WELDING AND INSPECTION OF STAINLESS ALLOY PIPING

This TIP outlines considerations for fitup, welding, and inspection of circumferential butt welds made during shop
spooling and field installation of stainless alloy pipe and fittings; both thin wall (gauge) and thick wall (schedule).
The stainless alloys included are austenitic stainless steels, duplex stainless steels, and nickel base alloys. It is
assumed that:

• the weld root will not normally be accessible for direct visual inspection or repair
• all circumferential butt welds will be made using filler metal
• a solution heat treatment will not be performed after welding.

The goal is to provide guidance in obtaining welds appropriate for the intended service. Figures 3- 5 illustrate welds
in thin wall stainless steel piping that were not fit for the intended purpose due to incomplete root penetration. The
welds were leaking due to corrosion and cracking due to fatigue.

Welding Preparation

Avoiding iron contamination. All equipment for the storage, handling, and welding preparation of stainless alloys
should be covered or faced with material that will prevent contamination by carbon steel particles. Grinding or
sanding discs previously used on carbon steel should not be used on stainless alloys. Iron contamination can
significantly reduce corrosion resistance in some alloy/environment cases while in other cases it is not a concern.
For example, carbon steel contamination (rust) of stainless alloys is not generally a concern for service in alkaline
kraft liquors or on nonprocess side surfaces (except for appearance).
Cutting and grinding. Machining, sawing, grinding, or plasma cutting are commonly used to cut stainless alloy
pipe. If plasma cutting is used, care should be taken to protect the process side of the pipe from spatter. It is good
practice to grind or sand plasma cut edges to remove the hard glassy residue from the cutting process.

Overheating during grinding should be avoided, as it can reduce the corrosion resistance in some cases. Only
grinding or sanding discs designed for use with stainless alloys should be used. Grinding or sanding discs
previously used on carbon steel should not be used on stainless alloys .

Cleaning. The weld joint should be free of burrs, lubricants, grease, paint, filings, and cuttings. Solvent cleaning
should be done with non-chlorinated solvents. Tools or materials used to clean joints should not contaminate the
stainless alloy with iron, carbon or other residues. For example wire brushes or steel wool used to clean joints
should be made from austenitic stainless steel (which is nonmagnetic) and be marked as stainless steel.

Joint Preparation. Joint preparation can influence penetration and weld metal dilution by base metal. An
inadequate root gap may result in incomplete penetration and incomplete mixing of the filler metal with the base
metal. The joint preparation and root gap must be included in the welding procedure specification (WPS).

Fit up. Good fit up of the joint is crucial for high quality welding. Poor fit up can make it difficult for the welder to
fuse both side of the weld root. An unfused root can be a stress raiser for fatigue cracking and/or a site for deposit
formation and corrosion.

Large diameter thin wall pipe and fittings are often out of round and require adjustment during fit up. Joint
alignment can be done with mechanical devices and should be free of depressions and bumps. Heat should not be
used in the alignment of joints where it has been determined that the corrosion resistance of the alloy may be
reduced.

Misalignment tolerances should be specified in consideration of the wall thicknesses involved and the service
requirements. ANSI/ASME B31.3 requires that the inside surfaces of pipe be aligned within the dimensional
tolerances of the welding procedure specification (WPS,) but provides no further guidance.

A commonly used guideline for allowable misalignment is 1.6 mm (1/16”). For thin wall pipe ( e.g. 10 gauge pipe
with a 3.5 mm wall) this could produce misalignment up to 50% of the pipe wall thickness and present the welder
with a challenge, depending on the weld acceptance criteria.

Welding

Welding processes. Gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW), sometimes referred to as TIG welding, generally gives the
best quality and is preferable for the root pass and one or more of the subsequent passes. Subsequent passes can be
made by:
• GTAW
• gas metal arc welding (GMAW), sometimes referred to as MIG welding
• flux cored arc welding (FCAW)
• shielded metal arc welding (SMAW)

GMAW and FCAW are sometimes referred to generically as wire feed welding, however, the specific terms above
are preferable to avoid confusion.

It is important to note that field installation requires some welds be done "out of position", that is, the pipe cannot be
rotated or positioned to facilitate welding. This may limit the applicability of some welding processes. For example
GMAW performed out of position may produce lack of fusion, and short circuit mode GMAW (GMAW-S) is
generally not suitable for pressure piping welds.
Welding Procedures. Written welding procedures are essential. Section IX "Welding and brazing qualifications"17
of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code lists the welding variables to be included in a welding procedure
specification (WPS) and also defines how the WPS must be qualified. The welding procedure qualification (WPQ) is
documented and is said to support the WPS. The tests involved in qualifying a WPS are given in Section IX which
is referred to by ANSI/ASME B31.3. Thus, if B31.3 is mandatory in a given jurisdiction, so are the relevant parts
of Section IX.

It should be realized that the WPS and WPQ requirements of ASME Section IX represent minimum mechanical
requirements for pressurized service, and it may be necessary to supplement them with additional requirements
relevant to the intended service.- e.g. requirements for corrosion resistance or special surface finish.

It is good practice to post the welding procedures (and inspection standards) at the job site, for ready access by
welders, inspectors, and owner’s personnel.

Welder Qualification and Certification. Welders should generally be qualified per ASME Section IX which
gives minimum requirements for welder qualification (WQ) in the WPS’s which will be used. A welder may qualify
to weld a range of pipe sizes and wall thicknesses in different positions, by passing an appropriate test on a particular
pipe in a particular position. If the welder has not welded to a given WPS in a certain time, he is required to
requalify in that procedure. For non- pressurized, non-critical services (e.g. drains) the owner may elect to specify
alternative qualification requirements.

To simplify WPS requirements, some jurisdictions and associations have devised “prequalified welding procedures”
which may be used by contractors. Several jurisdictions and associations have also devised welder qualification
schemes in which each welder carries a log book which lists the procedures in which he is currently qualified ( or
certified). Certification does not necessarily guarantee that welders will be capable of meeting the requirements of a
given job. For difficult welding positions, or for severe service welds, it may be desirable for welders to be skill
tested using the welding equipment, welding positions and pipe sizes that will be used in the job. Welder
qualification or skill testing on production welds is generally not recommended.

Tack welding. Tack welds that will become part of the final weld should be performed after preweld purging has
been completed. At least 4 tack welds should be made, spaced 90° apart around the pipe. For pipe 250 mm (10”)
diameter and larger, tacks should be made at least every 150 mm (6”) and should be long enough to resist weld
shrinkage forces which will try to pull the root closed. The welder should check tack welds for cracking and any
cracked tack welds should be ground out. Before making the root pass, tack welds should be free of oxides and both
ends should be ground and tapered to promote complete fusion into the root pass.

Weld Root Shielding. It is good practice to protect the weld root from oxidation. Severe oxidation of a weld root
can lead to lack of penetration, irregular root profile, and reduction of corrosion resistance and mechanical
properties, including fatigue resistance. Weld heat tint may be acceptable in some services, but this depends on the
stainless alloy used and the severity of the corrosion involved.

The best way to prevent weld root oxidation is to shield the weld root with an inert gas such as argon. The WPS
should include the minimum purge gas flow rate, as well as the purging time for each pipe diameter and purge dam
spacing to be employed. It is not necessary to purge the entire run of pipe if purge dams are used. Water soluble
purge dams are available for closure welds in a pipe run. AWS D10.11 18 may be used as a guideline for argon
purging.

Nitrogen or nitrogen/hydrogen gas mixtures are also used (Formier gas, 90/10 N2/H2, is commonly used in Europe).
If nitrogen or nitrogen /hydrogen gas mixtures are used, purge flow rates and/or times will be different than for
argon. It is good practice to post a table of purge gas flow rates and times at the job site if these have not been
included in the posted WPS. Welder skill testing should include the use of root purging.

Purging should be maintained during the root pass, and may be required for one or more subsequent passes to
prevent oxidation of the root due to melt-through or heating by the covering passes. As an overall check on purging,
the amount of purge gas used daily can be recorded.
Each welder can inspect the weld root visually for oxidation before he closes the root pass.

Portable oxygen monitors are also available to check the concentration of oxygen remaining in a purged volume.
British Standard BS 747519 states :
• less than 1% oxygen is often specified for stainless alloy piping systems
• less than 0.5% oxygen is required to prevent root discoloration ( heat tint) in pipe up to 50 mm ( 2”) diameter
• oxygen levels approaching zero are needed to prevent heat tint in pipe greater than 200 mm ( 8”) diameter.

Reference color charts have been developed which show the heat tint on stainless steel weld roots as a function of
purging gas type and oxygen concentration at the weld root20,21 Where it has been established that control of heat tint
is important for corrosion performance, a reference weld or color chart can be used as an acceptance standard.

Fluxes are available which are intended to protect the weld root from oxygen. They are typically supplied as a dry
powder, which is mixed with alcohol to make a paste and then applied on the inside surface of the pipe adjacent to
the weld root and on the faces of the weld preparation. During welding the flux melts and flows over the molten root
and adjacent parent metal. Unfortunately, flux can dry out and fall off the inside surface of the pipe if the pipe is
handled roughly during fit up.

When mixed and applied according to the manufacturer’s instructions, fluxes can be effective in limiting oxidation
of the molten weld root and allowing full penetration welds with reasonable profiles. They are less effective in
preventing heat tint, and they leave a flux residue on the root which may be undesirable in some services. Figure 6
shows a cross section of a GTAW weld in type 316L stainless steel thin wall pipe. The weld was made with
voltage and current specified in the WPS and with flux applied in accordance with the manufacturer’s
recommendations. The weld profile is good, but at higher magnifications, grain boundary contamination is apparent
at the toes of the root pass. This may be a site for corrosion in some services. Figure 7 shows a weld made with flux
shielding by the same welder, but with 70 A current instead of the specified 60A. The weld cap is good, but the root
side is rejectable.

Because of the sensitivity of flux shielding to procedural variations, it is recommended that written instructions for
the use of flux be developed and included in the (WPS). Flux should be used in welder skill testing. It is further
recommended that the acceptability of flux shielding be evaluated in consideration of the service requirements.
Reference 22 reports the results of an investigation where both purged and flux protected welds in 317L stainless
steel pipe were tested in ferric chloride solution, (which is a "not unreasonable" simulation of a bleach crevice
environment), and in a paper machine simulated white water. In ferric chloride solution, nitrogen and argon purged
welds did not pit, while flux protected roots experienced severe pitting. In the simulated white water none of the
weld roots pitted, but the flux protected roots rusted. The simulated white water used for the test was, however, not
particularly corrosive due to a high ratio of sulfate ion to chloride ion.

Flux cored and flux coated filler rods. Proprietary filler rods with flux coating or flux cores are also available as
an alternative to inert gas purging for root pass welding. The effectiveness of these fillers depends on welder skill
and adherence to the manufacturer's instructions. For example, the pipe wall thickness and the weld root gap can
influence performance..

If flux coated or flux cored filler rods are to be used, the instructions for their use should be included in the WPS and
they should be used in welder skill testing.

These products are not effective in preventing heat tint of the base metal adjacent to the weld, and they leave a flux
residue on the weld root. They should not be used for services where corrosion will occur under adherent flux. For
example Figure 8 shows a coupon containing a GTAW butt weld made in 316L pipe using flux coated 317L GTAW
rod. After 60 days exposure at pH 6 in a D2 stage bleach washer vat, the faces of the 316L coupon were not
corroded while severe corrosion occurred at crevice sites under the serrated mounting washer and also under flux
which adhered to the 317L filler metal.
Identification of welds. It is good practice to mark each weld with the name or number of the welder.
Identification of welds is required by ANSI/ASME B31.3.

Post Weld Cleaning

As outlined in the "General considerations" section of this TIP, the nature and extent of post weld cleaning of weld
roots should be based on consideration of the effect on service performance and the cost of cleaning. Complete
removal of oxide and heat tint may require a combination of mechanical and chemical cleaning. This may be difficult
for long runs of pipe where worker access to the inside is not possible.

The most effective chemical cleaning agents for stainless alloys are pastes, gels, or solutions containing nitric and
hydrofluoric acids. These agents are harmful to human tissue, and proper safety precautions should be followed in
their use. In addition, most jurisdictions will have environmental regulations governing proper disposal. Safety,
application, and disposal instructions are available from the manufacturers of these products.

Inspection

The requirements for weld inspection methods and scope, hold points, and weld acceptance criteria should be clearly
understood. A pre-job “quality” meeting between the owner (or owner’s representative), the welding contractor
and welders, and inspection personnel can be useful in identifying and resolving differences in understanding before
the work begins.

Some means of dispute resolution should be agreed upon before work begins. The dispute resolution agreement
should address options, responsibilities, and costs for obtaining a second opinion on rejected welds including cut
out of welds for verification of volumetric inspection results (radiographic testing or ultrasonic testing).

Visual (VT) and radiographic testing (RT) are commonly used for circumferential welds in stainless alloy piping.
Ultrasonic testing (UT) is generally limited to thicker wall piping, e.g. for wall thickness greater than about 5mm
(0.2”).

Visual examination. VT should be performed to ensure the fit up meets alignment and gap requirements. The root
side of all circumferential butt welds should be visually examined by the welder before the root is closed. This
requires a flashlight if the root is not readily visible from one end of the pipe. Larger diameter pipe may be inspected
from the inside, but this usually requires a confined space procedure.

Each weld pass can be visually examined from the outside for freedom from cracking, slag, porosity, and undercut.
In addition, the final weld pass should be examined for a smooth transition to base metal. Visual examination should
always precede volumetric examination (RT, UT).

Visual examination can be performed for weld root oxidation and heat tint, if this is a specification requirement, and
if some weld roots are visually accessible. A videoprobe can be used for visual examination of weld roots for
incomplete penetration, excessive reinforcement, and oxidation or heat tint.

Radiographic examination. RT is performed to detect cracks, incomplete penetration, lack of fusion, porosity,
and slag . Root oxidation can be detected by RT if it is severe enough to result in incomplete penetration, “sugaring”,
fissuring, or “grapes”.

Positive Materials Identification. A portable alloy analyzer can be used to confirm the composition of base metal
and the weld filler metal. The amount of dilution of an overmatching filler by base metal can be determined.
Extent of inspection. Each welder’s first two production welds should be inspected using the inspection techniques
that have been specified. If these welds are acceptable, subsequent welds should be inspected at random so that
some percentage of each welder’s work or total weld length is inspected - 5 to 10% is not uncommon. ANSI/ASME
B31.3 paragraph 341.3.4 provides for increasing the extent of examination when defects are revealed.

ANSI/ASME B31.3 is a useful guide to inspection requirements and may be mandatory in some jurisdictions.
However, it is not adequate simply to reference B31.3, as the extent of inspection depends on the fluid service
designation determined by the owner. The owner is free to increase the extent of inspection as part of the
engineering specification, but cannot decrease it if this code is mandatory. Table IV summarizes the approach taken
in B31.3. Reference should be made to B31.3 for further details.

Table IV. Inspection requirements in ANSI/ASME B31.3

Fluid Service Definition Examination
category D non-flammable VT only required
non-toxic extent is that necessary to satisfy the examiner
not damaging to human tissues see paragraph 341.4.2 of B31.3
design pressure ≤ 1 MPa (150 psig)
-28°C ≥ design T ≤ 186°C
(-20°F ≥ design T ≤ 366° F)
normal fluid fluid service not classified as category D,M, VT plus either RT or UT required
service severe cyclic, or high pressure. extent is a minimum of 5% of fabrication
covering the work of each welder or welding
operator
see paragraph 341.4.1 of B31.3
category M potential for personnel exposure judged to VT plus either RT or UT required
be significant extent of VT is 100%
extent of RT or UT is a minimum of 20%
single exposure to a small quantity of the see paragraph M341.4 of B31.3
fluid can cause serious irreversible harm

severe cyclic the displacement stress range, Se, due to VT plus RT

bending and torsional stresses exceeds 0.8 of
the allowable displacement stress range, SA
and the number of full displacement cycles
during the expected life of the system
exceeds 7,000
high pressure service for which the owner specifies the use
of B31.3 chapter IX
high pressure is defined as greater than that
allowed by ASME B16.5 "Pipe flanges and
fittings" Class 2000 rating for the specified
design pressure and temperature
extent of VT and RT is 100%
UT may be substituted for RT if specified in
the engineering design
see paragraph 341.4.3 of B31.3
VT plus RT
extent of both is 100%
UT cannot be substituted for RT
see paragraph K341.4 of B31.3

Acceptance criteria. ANSI/ASME B31.3 includes acceptance criteria for each of the fluid service categories. The
owner can specify more stringent requirements, weighing the added cost and benefits, but cannot relax the B31.3
acceptance criteria if this code is mandatory. If B31.3 is not mandatory, the owner can specify the acceptance
criteria based on an assessment of fitness for service.

Typical acceptance criteria for general stock line applications of thin wall stainless steel pipe are given below. These
do not meet all of the requirements of B31.3, but have been found to be useful in practice.
• misalignment
less than or equal to 50% of the pipe wall thickness, providing both sides of the joint are fused and the
requirements for incomplete penetration are met

• incomplete penetration
less than 20 mm (3/4”) length of continuous incomplete penetration in 150 mm ( 6”) of weld
or a total of 20 mm of separated occurrences of incomplete penetration in 6” of weld.
• underfill
underfill to a maximum of 20% of the pipe wall thickness provided both sides of the joint have been fused and
the underfill has rounded contour.

• root protrusion
root protrusion less than or equal to 2.4 mm (3/32”) provided the root profile is smooth so as
not to act as a stress raiser

ANSI/ASME does not address weld root oxidation or heat tint. If control of weld root oxidation or heat tint has been
specified, then an appropriate reference weld or color chart can be used as a comparator for inspection.

REFERENCES

1. "Recommended specifications for stainless steel piping, fittings and accessories for the pulp and paper industry,
3rd edition". Atlanta, Tappi Press, 1986.
2. "ASME Code for pressure piping, B31.3:Process piping". ANSI/ASME B31.3. New York, The American
Society of Mechanical Engineers.

3. "Corrosion". D.F. Bowers. Chapter 10 (pp. 349-407) in Mill control & control systems: quality & testing,
environmental, corrosion, electrical. Volume 9 of Pulp and Paper Manufacture,3 rd edition. Atlanta, TAPPI,
1992.

4. "Corrosion in the pulp and paper industry". edited by Andrew Garner. Pages 1187-1220 in Corrosion. Volume
13 of the Metals Handbook, 9th edition. Metals Park, Ohio, ASM International, 1987.

5. "Stainless steels for pulp and paper manufacturing". Washington, D.C., Committee of Iron and Steel Producers
of the American Iron and Steel Institute, 1982. Distributed by the Nickel Development Institute. Currently
being revised.

6. "Guidelines for the welded fabrication of nickel-containing stainless steels for corrosion-resistant services".
Richard E. Avery and A.H. Tuthill. Nickel Development Institute Publication 11 007. Toronto, 1992.

7. "Corrosion behavior of welded stainless steel". T.G. Gooch. Welding Journal :Welding Research Supplement,
May 1996, pp. 135s-154s

8. "Corrosion behavior of stainless steel, nickel base alloy and titanium weldments in chlorination and chlorine
dioxide bleaching". Arthur Tuthill, Richard Avery, and Andrew Garner, 7th International Symposium on
Corrosion in the Pulp and Paper Industry, Orlando, 1992, pp.67-86. Atlanta, TAPPI, 1992.

9. "Austenitic stainless steels: welding must take account of service conditions". T. Boniszewski. Metals and
Materials, December 1978/January 1979, pp.41-47.

10. "The manufacture of welded stainless steel tubing for maximum corrosion resistance in kraft evaporators". S.E.
Doughty and W.J. Comerford. Tappi Journal, vol.44 no.9 (September 1961), pp. 609-613.
11. "GTAW root pass welding of 6% molybdenum austenitic stainless steel pipe - open root joint with hand fed
filler". Tappi TIP 0402-20. Atlanta, Tappi Press, 1994.

12. "Fabrication and post fabrication cleanup of stainless steels". Arthur H. Tuthill , Nickel Development Institute
Publication 10 004, Toronto, 1989.

13. "Effect of some surface treatments on corrosion of stainless steel". G.E. Coates. CORROSION '90 Paper #539.
Houston, NACE International, 1990.

14. "Effect of post weld cleaning on corrosion resistance of austenitic and duplex stainless steel weldments in bleach
plant service". D.W. Christie. 7th International Symposium on Corrosion in the Pulp and Paper Industry,
Orlando, 1992, pp.87-95. Atlanta, TAPPI, 1992.

15. "Welding of duplex stainless steel". Tappi TIP 0402-23. Atlanta, Tappi Press, 1998.

16. "Qualification of duplex stainless steel welds". Tappi TIP in preparation 1999.

17. "ASME Boiler and pressure vessel code section IX: qualification standard for welding and brazing procedures,
welders, brazers, and welding operators". New York, American Society of Mechanical Engineers.

18. "Recommended practices for root pass welding and gas purging". ANSI/AWS Standard D10.11. Miami,
American Welding Society.

19. Specification for fusion welding of austenitic stainless steels. British Standard BS 7475. London, British
Standards Institution.

20. "Root surface quality requirements - high efficiency purging or pickling? ". J. Vagn Hansen, T.S. Nielsen, and
P. Aastrup. Paper 46 in volume 2 of Duplex 94: 4th International conference on duplex stainless steels,
Glasgow, 1994. Cambridge, Abington Publishing, 1995.

21. "Reference colour charts - for purging gas in stainless steel tubes". J. Vagn Hansen. FORCE Institute report
94.34. Copenhagen, FORCE Institute, 1994.

22. "Corrosion evaluation of stainless steel root weld shielding". Margaret Gorog and Linda Sawyer. CORROSION
99 paper no. 277. NACE, Houston, 1999, 6pp.
Figure 1. Fatigue crack at root of incompletely penetrated circumferential butt joint in 316L thin gauge pipe. Weld
was made with poor fitup and flux for root protection (16X, electrolytic etch in 10% oxalic acid).

Figure 2. Radiographs of longitudinal welds in 24" diameter 316L stainless steel 90° elbows. The defects were first
found on radiography of circumferential butt joints.
Figure 3. Inside surface of a circumferential butt weld in a 316L stainless steel stock line in corrosive paper machine
white water service. The butt weld was made with flux for root protection and was not fully penetrated. The crevice
in the root, combined with flux residue and weld heat tint, resulted in severe corrosion and leaking.

Figure 4. Leaking at a weld in 316L stainless steel thin gauge pipe, due to incomplete root penetration and
corrosion.
Figure 5. External repairs made to fatigue cracking which initiated at an incompletely penetrated root in a paper
machine stock line weld. Such external repairs are temporary, as fatigue cracking will persist if root imperfections
and cyclic loading remain. Note that the cracking has diverged into the base metal.

Figure 6. Cross section of a circumferential butt joint made with application of root flux according to the
manufacturer's instructions and welding within the specified parameters. The root profile is good but intergranular
penetration/precipitation has occurred at the root side weld toes. This penetration might be detrimental in some
services (upper cross section 16X, lower cross section 250X, electrolytically etched in 10% oxalic acid).
Figure 7. Cross section of a circumferential butt weld made by the same welder as Figure 6 with properly applied
flux for root protection, but with 10 amps greater welding current - i.e. outside the specified parameters. The weld
cap is good, but the weld root is not acceptable (16X electrolytically etched in 10% oxalic acid).

Figure 8. Root side of a GTAW weld made with flux coated GTAW rod in 3 mm wall 316L pipe. The coupon was
cut from the as welded pipe and exposed at pH 6 in a D2 stage bleach washer for 60 days. Crevice corrosion
occurred in the 316L pipe under the serrated mounting washer and in the 317L weld filler under adherent flux. The
other side of the 317L weld, which had been shielded by Argon did not corrode although there was minor corrosion
of the 316L under light heat tint.
Table II. ASTM specifications for austenitic stainless steel pipe

ASTM Title Filler Heat treat Cold Size range 1 Tolerances Tests
metal work
OD wall oval HT ET UT PT RT Corr
A312- Seamless and welded N annealed opt 1/8 - 30 NPS broad -12.5% ≤ 1.5% Y opt opt S5 S5 S7
98 austenitic stainless steel pipes SCH 5-80
A358- Electric fusion welded Y annealed usually > 3 +0.5% -0.01’’ 1% Y S3 Y2 S6
98 austenitic Cr-Ni alloy steel as welded opt NPS
pipe
A409- Welded large diameter opt annealed 14-30 NPS broad -12.5% ≤ 1.5% Y opt opt S2 S6
95ae1 austenitic steel pipe as welded opt SCH 5, 10
A778- Welded unannealed austenitic opt not annealed 3 - 48” OD broad +12.5% ≤ 1.5% S4 S2
98 stainless steel tubular .062”/0.50”
products wall
A813- Single or double welded N annealed 1/8 - 30 NPS moder +12.5% ≤ 1.5% Y S5 S6 S7 S8
95 austenitic stainless steel pipe SCH 5 - 80 ate
A814- Cold worked welded N annealed Y 1/8 - 4 NPS tight < + 10% OD Y S5 S6 S7
96 austenitic stainless steel pipe SCH 5 - 80 tol’s
General notes
Unless otherwise noted, the standard broad tolerances for dimensions listed in ASTM A530 “Standard specification
for general requirements for specialized carbon and alloy steel pipe” apply.

These specifications require mechanical testing to meet specified minimum values. The actual test results need not
be reported unless specified in the purchase order.

If hydrotesting (HT), eddy current testing (ET), ultrasonic testing (UT), liquid penetrant testing (PT), or radiographic
testing (RT), is required it is it is noted by a “Y” in the appropriate column. If these tests are available as
supplementary requirements the supplementary requirement number is noted in the appropriate column. If there is
no entry the test is not addressed by the specification.

Note 1: The specifications generally allow for provisions of other diameters and wall thicknesses than those listed
providing the pipe complies with all other requirements of the specification.
Note 2: Class 2 does not require radiographic inspection. Classes 1, 3, and 4 require 100% RT. Class 5 requires
spot radiography at a minimum of 1 foot every 50 feet.