Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40194-022-01370-w

RESEARCH PAPER

Solidification cracking in duplex stainless steel flux‑cored arc welds

Part 1—cracking in 30‑mm‑thick material welded under high restraint
Elin M. Westin1 · Andrea Putz2,3 · Andrea Maderthoner1 · Johan Pilhagen4

Received: 26 June 2022 / Accepted: 18 August 2022 / Published online: 1 October 2022
© International Institute of Welding 2022

Abstract
Duplex stainless steels show fully ferritic solidification and are thus considered generally resistant to hot cracking.
The few published cases where welds have been subject to solidification cracking could mostly be correlated to fairly
high ferrite contents and an unfavorable weld shape. A recent literature review suggests that all welding methods can to
some extent cause hot cracking and the risk increases in applications where heavy-wall material is welded under highly
restrained conditions. This paper collects three cases where solidification cracking has occurred with duplex flux-cored
wires in 30-mm-thick material welded under full restraint. Sidewall bend testing together with examination of fracture
surfaces proved efficient to detect and inspect cracks. The hot cracks were observed in primary ferrite grain boundaries
enveloped by austenite, but no clear correlation with the ferrite content could be found. Auger electron spectroscopy,
light optical, scanning and transmission electron microscopy were used to characterize cracks. The fracture surface
showed a clear transition of solidification mode from dendritic-flat to flat and particles were detected in the crack tip
of the last solidified material. The weld metal chemical composition and source of raw materials were identified to
affect the cracking susceptibility. The results indicate that the resistance may possibly be improved by optimization
of the composition and slag concept.

Keywords  Duplex stainless steel · FCAW​ · Solidification cracking · Phase balance · Low-melting phases · Impurities

1 Introduction corrosion resistance, mechanical properties, and fatigue

The susceptibility to weld solidification cracking depends
to a large extent on both the composition of the material
and the welding conditions [1, 2]. Mostly reported for
fully austenitic stainless steels, aluminum and nickel-base
alloys, the phenomenon can have a negative effect on the
Recommended for publication by Commission IX - Behaviour of
Metals Subjected to Welding
* Elin M. Westin
elin.westin@voestalpine.com
1
voestalpine Böhler Welding Austria GmbH,
Böhler‑Welding‑Str. 1, AT‑8605 Kapfenberg, Austria
2
Institute of Materials Science, Joining and Forming, Graz
University of Technology, AT‑8010 Graz, Austria
3
Now at Andritz AG Group Quality and Safety Management,
Stattegger Str. 18, AT‑8045 Graz, Austria
4
Outokumpu Stainless AB, Koppardalsvägen 65,
SE‑77422 Avesta, Sweden
[3–5]. In stainless steels, a crack-susceptible microstructure
present at the final stage of solidification due to the occur-
rence of low-melting, impurity-enriched liquid films, can
cause cracking when the tensile stresses developed across
the adjacent grains exceed the strength of the almost com-
pletely solidified weld metal [6–8]. Particularly sulfur and
phosphorus promote solidification cracking by lowering
the solidus temperature and lengthening the so-called brit-
tleness-temperature-range (BTR), and the risk increases if
the solidification occurs as primary austenite [9–12]. It has
been suggested that the concentration of these impurities at
the grain boundaries of austenitic stainless steels and thus
their damaging effect can be reduced if 5–20% δ-ferrite is
present [13–18].
The terminology “hot cracking” includes other phenomena
such as reheat, liquation and ductility dip cracking, but as
solidification cracking is the dominating form found in stain-
less steel welds, the words normally mean the same thing.
Regardless of wording, duplex stainless steels are rarely men-
tioned in the same sentence as solidification cracking. The

13
Vol.:(0123456789)
2406
main reason has been suggested to be the ferritic solidification
and suppressed segregation of low-melting phases [19, 20].
In the recent years, very few papers have been published
on the hot cracking susceptibility of duplex alloys. Saida
and Ogura [21] tested modern grades with laser and gas
tungsten arc welding (GTAW) and stated that lean, standard,
and super duplex materials were as resistant as austenitic
stainless steels solidifying in ferritic-austenitic mode. Cross
et al. [22] ranked the relative laser weldability of 11 different
austenitic, super austenitic, and duplex stainless grades with
the controlled tensile weldability (CTW) test and concluded
that the lean duplex grades UNS S32101 and UNS S32304
showed higher, and the standard duplex UNS S32205 lower
resistance to cracking than AISI 304L and AISI 316L.
On contrary, most publications ranking the cracking suscep-
tibility of different grades using GTAW melting while expos-
ing the material to progressively higher strain (transverse-strain
testing) would place the duplexes between austenitic stainless
steels with ferritic and fully austenitic solidification [1, 19, 23,
24]. In two older reports [25, 26], duplex plates above 10 mm
thickness showed solidification cracking with the shielded
metal arc welding (SMAW), gas metal arc welding (GMAW),
and submerged arc welding (SAW) processes.
No full papers have been dedicated lately to the phenom-
enon, but there have been reports on hot cracking observed
in UNS S32205 material after SAW, laser, and laser hybrid
welding, where cracking could be avoided after parameter
adjustments to increase the austenite formation and optimize
the weld bead shape [27, 28].
The weldability of duplex stainless steels has been
improved over the years by increasing the nitrogen content to
further promote austenite formation [29]. Utilizing the high
strength, duplex alloys are used more and more in applica-
tions where thick material is welded under high restraint.
This increases the susceptibility to hot cracking due to expo-
sure to higher strain and strain rates [1, 9, 27, 30–33].
Steel suppliers and wire manufacturers are aware of a
few other cases where solidification cracks have been found
in duplex stainless steels, but it is unclear how much of this
experience that has been published. A more detailed review
can be found in an earlier work [34]. Occasionally, there
are some reports on flux-cored wire formulations causing
solidification cracking when welding thick-walled duplex
material. In this work, Part 1, three real cases are presented
where cracking has occurred in weldments. The wires origi-
nated from different manufacturers and were produced in
2005, 2011, and 2016.
2 Experimental
The base metals were 30-mm-thick UNS S32101 and UNS
S32205 with the chemical composition given in Table 1.
13
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423
The selected filler metals were Ø 1.2 mm flux-cored wires
with dual classification for welding with both mixed gas
Ar + 18–25% ­CO2 (M21) and 100% ­CO2 (C1) (Table 2).
The wires were all intended for welding in best position
(denoted T0 in AWS A5.22 and R in EN ISO 17633-A).
They were reported to be sensitive to hot cracking by a weld-
ing institute investigating the fracture toughness of duplexes
and customers who contacted the base material or filler wire
manufacturers.
Plates were welded in flat position using the flux-cored
arc welding (FCAW) process with the parameters listed in
Table 3. Settings and selected joint preparations were taken
from actual welding procedures or chosen to simulate real
cases. The polarity was DC + , the wire stick-out 15–20 mm,
and the arc length approximately 3 mm. No preheating was
applied and the interpass temperature was max. 100 °C for
the lean duplex and max. 150 °C for the standard duplex
plates. The joints were clamped with transversely welded
plates to maintain a condition of high restraint. If present
on the surface after slag removal, residuals were removed
by light grinding.
V and X-joints were subject to radiographic X-ray
testing (EN ISO 17636–1). Dye-penetrant testing in
accordance with EN ISO 3452–1 was performed on the
fillet welds in the as-welded condition after removing
the slag. If there were no indications, the surface was
ground using a grinder and then the dye-penetrant test
was repeated.
Cross-sections of welds were polished to mirror fin-
ish with ­S iO 2 in the last step. The phase fractions
were revealed by etching in modified Beraha II (60 ml
­H2O + 30 ml HCl + 1 g ­K2S2O5 or 800 ml ­H2O + 400 ml
HCl + 48 g ­N H 4HF 2 + 6 g ­K 2S 2O 5) or 10% NaOH. The
etchants color the ferrite dark, distinguishing it from the
bright austenite. The ferrite content was measured from
the root to the cap in all individual weld beads using image
analysis with light optical microscopy (LOM) at a magni-
fication of 500 × . This is not standard procedure for mate-
rial of this thickness where the measurements normally
take place in the root and last weld bead only, but served
as additional information as cracks could be located also
in other weld beads.
Face out and transverse side bend tests were performed on
ground welds to an angle of 180° with a mandrel diameter
of 4 × t following ASTM E190 and EN ISO 5173. Bend tests
of fillet welds were simulated by manufacturing L-joints and
pressing the plates flat in a clamp in accordance with EN ISO
9017. Suspected solidification cracks were also opened by
means of fracture toughness testing as per ASTM E1921-97.
The specimens were manufactured and tested as described
by Sieurin [35]. The geometry of the tested specimens was
30 × 60 × 400 mm. All specimens were full-thickness single-
edge-notch bend-bars.
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423 2407

Table 1  Chemical composition Material t, mm C Si Mn P S Cr Ni Mo N

of the base materials, wt.-%
UNS S32101 30 0.032 0.66 4.92 0.025 0.001 21.5 1.60 0.29 0.232
UNS S32205 30 0.024 0.35 1.23 0.029 0.003 22.0 5.32 3.21 0.190
UNS S32205 30 0.016 0.49 1.41 0.023 0.001 22.4 5.20 3.12 0.186

Table 2  All-weld metal Wire AWS A5.22 Mfg year C Si Mn P S Cr Ni Mo N

composition of flux-cored wires
welded with Ar + 18% ­CO2, 2307T0 E2307T0-4/1 2005 0.020 0.61 0.83 0.019 0.011 24.9 8.97 0.13 0.130
wt.-%
2209T0-A E2209T0-4/1 2011 0.022 0.72 0.92 0.018 0.008 22.5 8.97 3.23 0.122
2209T0-B E2209T0-4/1 2016 0.021 0.76 1.07 0.021 0.007 23.0 8.72 3.16 0.145

Fracture surfaces from bend and fracture toughness test-
ing were examined by means of scanning electron micros-
copy (SEM). The different instruments used were LEO 440,
Hitachi S-3700 N, and Zeiss Ultra 55. Energy dispersive
X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) was applied for characterization
of surface deposits using EDAX from Oxford Instruments.
A JEOL Jamp-9500F Auger electron spectroscopy
(AES) instrument was used to analyze fracture surfaces.
The as-received samples were cleaned in an ultrasonic
bath with tetrahydrofuran (THF), isopropanol and etha-
nol, twice in each solvent for 15  min. Measurements
were carried out using a primary electron energy of
10.0 keV and a current of 7.64 × ­1 0 −9 A. The analyzer
mode was M5 Multi. The size of the analysis spot was
approximately 30 nm.
Site-specific lamellas were prepared using a focus ion
beam (FIB) dual beam microscope FEI NOVA200 after
the region of interest was defined in SEM mode. The sam-
ple surface of a 100-nm-thick FIB lamella with a size of
8 × 4 µm was subject to conductive platinum via particle-
induced deposition from the gas phase. For atomic resolu-
tion imaging and analytics, the sample was examined in
a high-resolution scanning transmission electron micro-
scope (HR-STEM) FEI ­Titan3 G2 60–300 equipped with
high-sensitivity EDS spectrum imaging for fast elemental
mapping at high spatial resolution (FEI ChemiSTEM tech-
nology with Super-X detector by Bruker). The instrument
was probe aberration-corrected for HR-STEM imaging and
equipped with a high brightness electron gun (FEI X-FEG)
for enhanced energy resolution. Annular dark-field (ADF)
and high-angle dark-field (HAADF) detectors were used
to acquire the HR-STEM images and fast Fourier trans-
formation (FFT) for crystallographic identification of the
high-resolution images.

Table 3  Welding parameters
Parameters Wire 2307T0 Wire 2209T0-A Wire 2209T0-B

Base metal UNS S32101 UNS S32205 UNS S32205

Thickness, mm 30 30 30
Shielding gas Ar + 25% ­CO2 + 0.03% NO Ar + 18% ­CO2 100% ­CO2
Joint type X V Fillet K
Welding position PA / 1G PA / 1G PB/2F
Opening angle 70° 60° 55°/50°
Gap, mm 3–4 4 1
Land, mm 2 0 2
Voltage, V 32–33 20–32 27–29
Current, A 235–265 230–250 206–230
Welding speed, m/min 0.30–0.50 0.44–0.48 0.23–0.27
Arc energy, kJ/mm 0.95–1.61 0.93–1.09 1.24–1.62
Gas flow, l/min 20 18 16
No. of weld beads 13 26 15
Root support N/A 15 mm UNS S32205 backing plate N/A

13
2408
Table 4  Weld metal ferrite measurements welded with image analysis
Base metal Joint type Filler Shielding gas
UNS S32101 X 2307T0 Ar + 25% ­CO2 + 0.03% NO
UNS S32205 V 2209T0-A Ar + 18% ­CO2
UNS S32205 K 2209T0-B 100% ­CO2
3 Results
3.1 Non‑destructive and destructive testing
Radiographic X-ray testing did not detect any solidifica-
tion cracks in the V and X-joints; neither did dye-pene-
trant testing of the as-welded surface after removing the
slag on the filler weld beads. After grinding, small indi-
cations could occasionally be found in fillet welds with
dye-penetrant testing.
The X-joint in UNS S32101 welded with 2307T0
did not show any cracks in the face out bend test, but
the fracture surface after fracture toughness testing
revealed solidification cracks. The V-joint in UNS
S32205 welded with 2209T0-A failed the transverse
sidewall bend testing and completely broke into half.
The L-joint in UNS S32205 performed with 2209T0-B
failed in the weld metal. Cracks were visible on all the
fracture surfaces.
3.2 Ferrite content
The average ferrite content measured for the differ-
ent welds is shown in Table 4. The austenite fraction
increased with each weld layer, but the last weld pass
showed the highest ferrite content. Some slag particles
were found in the weld metal, but the amount of vis-
ible chromium nitride precipitates was low. The ferrite
content within one single weld pass could vary sig-
nificantly, where the part of the previous pass being
Fig. 1  Weld pass in UNS
S32101 welded with wire
2307T0 with a ferrite, grain
boundary and Widmanstätten
austenite and b formation of
intragranular secondary austen-
ite in ferrite grains on reheating
(polished cross-section etched
with Beraha II)
13
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423
reheated by subsequent weld(s) showed formation of
Ferrite secondary austenite (Figs. 1a, b and 2a, b).
45 ± 6%
3.3 Examination of X‑joints in lean duplex UNS
38 ± 7%
S32101 welded with 2307T0
34 ± 9%
The investigated fracture toughness tested sample of 30 mm
UNS S32101 welded with wire 2307T0 showed 0.4–1.9-mm-
long solidification cracks in four weld beads and these
appeared repeatedly along the weld length, (Fig. 3a). The
cracks were located in the outer 1/3 region on both sides of
the X-joint and none were found in the center of the plate (root
pass). The largest crack can be seen in higher magnification in
Fig. 3b where different layers indicate that the crack consisted
of several smaller cracks. The lower part of the image would
be the last solidified melt (crack tip) and the upper part of
the crack was possibly welded over and partly melted by the
subsequent weld pass. The upper part of the cracks showed
some porosity. SEM confirmed dendritic solidification typical
that of hot cracking (Fig. 4a). There was also a clear transi-
tion from dendritic structure to flat in the direction the crack
propagated (Fig. 4b). In the flat area, particles were visible at
the crack tip using the secondary electron (SE) mode and in
backscatter electron (BSE) mode; these were distinguished
as a bright phase (Figs. 5a, b and 6a–c). EDS confirmed that
the particles mainly consist of bismuth (Fig. 6d). Traces of
chromium, iron, and sulfur were also detected.
3.4 Examination of V‑joints in duplex UNS S32205
welded with 2209T0‑A
Cross-sections of the UNS S32205 plate welded with wire
2209T0-A in a V-joint were examined with LOM. Several
small cracks with a size of 0.28–1.06 mm were located in
the primary ferrite grain boundaries in the lower part of
each pass, mostly about 0.05–0.10 mm from the fusion line
(Fig. 7a–c). One crack was found also in the center of the
weld bead (Fig. 7d).
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423 2409

Fig. 2  Weld pass in UNS

S32205 welded with wire
2209T0-B with a ferrite, grain
boundary and Widmanstätten
austenite and b intragranular
secondary austenite in ferrite
grains on reheating (polished
cross-section etched with
Beraha II)

Fig. 3  Fracture surfaces of
UNS S32101 welded with wire
2307T0 after fracture tough-
ness testing at – 60 °C a with
cracks indicated and b SEM
image (SE) of the largest hot
crack found with encircled areas
showing pores

Fig. 4  SEM examination of
solidification crack in UNS
S32101 welded with 2307T0
with a secondary electron (SE)
detector showing a dendritic
solidification and b transition
from dendritic to flat solidifica-
tion mode

Fig. 5  SEM examination of
solidification crack in UNS
S32101 welded with 2307T0 in
a SE and b BSE mode

13
2410 Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423

Fig. 6  SEM examination of
solidification crack in UNS
S32101 welded with wire
2307T0 with a dendritic solidi-
fication (SE), b bright particles
located in the flat region in a
band of 0.06–0.15 mm width
(BSE), c particles found in the
rectangle in a (BSE), and d EDS
spectrum showing predominant
presence of bismuth and some
iron, chromium and sulfur

A failed sidewall bend test sample was investigated
with SEM/EDS. Dendrites were seen in the cracks on the
fracture surface, which confirmed ferritic solidification
(Fig. 8a). Cellular dendrites could be observed (Fig. 8b).
At the tip of one of the cracks, there was a flat region with
particles consisting of primarily bismuth (80Bi-10C-5Fe-
3O-2Cr) (Fig. 8c).
3.5 Examination of K‑joints in duplex UNS S32205
welded with 2209T0‑B
Several fillet welds on UNS S32205 welded with 2209T0-B
were sectioned and broken to examine cracks with LOM,
SEM, AES, and TEM. The LOM investigation of different
welded layers and full welds showed that the cracks could

Fig. 7  UNS S32205 plate

welded in a V-joint with wire
2209T0-A showing cracks in
the upper half part of the joint.
a 1.06-mm-long crack close to
the fusion line, b 0.42-mm-long
crack close to the fusion line,
c 0.67-mm-long crack close to
the fusion line, d 0.71-mm-long
crack in the center of the weld
bead (polished cross-section
etched with 10% NaOH)

13
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423 2411

Fig. 8  A 30-mm UNS S32205

plate welded in a V-joint with
wire 2209T0-A. SEM images
using the SE detector and a
beam energy of 15 kV showing
a fracture surface with a typical
crack with visible dendrites b
cellular dendrites visible in on
fracture surface and c bismuth
particles in the flat region of
one of the cracks

appear along primary ferrite grain boundaries in any weld
bead, but that they were mostly located in a few passes in the
upper section of the fillet weld (Fig. 9). Some were found in
previous weld passes that had been welded over (Fig. 9a).
The majority were shorter than 1.0 mm, but the range varied
between 0.22 and 1.83 mm. They were located at a distance
of 0.29–0.58 mm from the surface, with the exception of the
crack in Fig. 9b, which was nearly surface breaking.
The 0.36-mm-long crack in Fig.  10a was repolished
and examined by means of SEM. With backscatter, it was
revealed that a bright phase was located in the tip of the
crack (Fig. 10b). EDS analysis showed that it consisted pri-
marily of bismuth (Fig. 11a), but a region containing mainly
manganese, iron, and sulfur were also identified (Fig. 11b).
The SEM examination of a crack discovered in an L-joint
after bend testing revealed a dendritic solidification pat-
tern (Fig. 12a). In BSE mode, many bright particles were
detected in a 0.2–0.3-mm-wide band along the crack tip
(Fig. 12b). The EDS analysis showed that these particles
primarily consisted of bismuth, but particles rich in manga-
nese and sulfur were also observed.
A typical hot crack was examined using AES. Fig-
ure 13a shows the region chosen within a flatter area of
the solidification pattern and Fig. 13b the positions where
the first six spectra were recorded. Small holes could be
observed on the surface. The results from spectrum 1 and
7 can be seen in Fig.  14a and b, respectively, and the
average composition for eight locations can be found in
Table 5. The highest concentrations detected were oxy-
gen, carbon, iron, and bismuth. Bismuth was identified
as a double peak at 96–100 eV and a weaker double peak
at 265–269 eV. There was also a rather weak signal found
around 261–263 eV.
HR-STEM/EDS was used to identify particles found in
a solidification crack. The composition measured in SEM
mode in Fig. 15 was 71Bi-9S-7.5Pb-5Ni-3Fe-2.5Co-2O.

Fig. 9  Cracks in the third layer

of a UNS S32205 fillet weld
welded from both sides with
2209T0-B in the a third weld
pass and b fourth weld pass
(polished cross-sections etched
with Beraha II)

13
2412 Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423

Fig. 10  UNS S32205 fillet weld

welded from both sides with
2209T0-B showing with a LOM
a 0.36-mm crack located in the
previous pass close to the fusion
line of the next bead (polished
cross-section etched with
Beraha II) and b SEM revealing
a bright phase (polished cross-
section examined in BSE mode)

Fig. 11  EDS analysis of composition in different locations in Fig. 10b a spectrum 30 with primarily bismuth and b spectrum 32 with manga-
nese, iron, sulfur, and chromium (wt.-%)

Fig. 12  UNS S32205 welded

with 2209T0-B showing a an
overview of crack and b band of
bright particles (BSE)

Figure 16a, b shows high-resolution images of a site-specific
FIB lamella across one of the particles.
Figure 17 shows EDS mapping of the bismuth particle in
Fig. 16 with significant presence of bismuth, lead, and sulfur.
The platinum analyzed originates from the conductive layer
intentionally deposited. This layer also contained carbon.
Figure 18a shows an EDS line scan of the phase bound-
ary from the base material into the bismuth particle that
according to the EDS analysis, Fig. 18b, contained about
65Bi-10Pb-10P-10S-5Fe with some traces of carbon and
oxygen.
Figure 19a–c shows an HR-STEM image of the bismuth
particle in Fig. 18 and in higher resolution using ADF and
HAADF modes. EDS line scans were performed over two of
the smaller particles of different shapes and color (Figs. 20a,
b and 21a, b. The particles had a composition of 41Bi-20Pb-
19S-11P-9Fe and 52Bi-17S-14Pb-11P-7Fe, respectively.
4 Discussion
4.1 Non‑destructive and destructive testing
Due to very small irregularities without voids, no cracks
were detected in as-welded condition using conventional
NDT techniques. As the cracks were not surface breaking,

13
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423 2413

Fig. 13  UNS S32205 welded

with 2209T0-B. AES investiga-
tion of a solidification crack a
overview with a transition from
dendritic-flat to flat surface and
b flat region at crack tip with
location of the six first analyses

Fig. 14  UNS S32205 welded with 2209T0-B. AES spectrum for a location 1 with bismuth, sulfur, carbon, calcium, oxygen, and iron, and b
location 7 with bismuth, sulfur, molybdenum, carbon, and calcium

the dye-penetrant testing also came out clean. After grind-
ing the surface of fillet welds, indications matching the
small cracks could occasionally be seen on the surface, but
due to the limited size, it is also possible that some were
eliminated by grinding.
No defects were found in the cap layer of the X-joints
due to the absence of (surface breaking) solidification
cracks; hence, the face out bend testing did not show any
signs of cracking. Sidewall bend testing, on the other hand,
was highly efficient to open and detect small cracks in the
cross-section of the welds. The L-joints simulating fillet
welds confirmed the results from the side bend testing.
ASME IX [36] sets the defect size limit to 3.2 mm on
side bend testing. Except for wire 2209T0-A where the

Table 5  Average analyzed Location C O Ca Fe Bi S Ni Mo Cr N

concentration measured with
AES, at.-% 1 20.7 41.9 2.0 13.6 10.6 0.6 1.5 1.6 1.7 5.4
2 23.8 28.8 3.0 10.4 6.1 2.0 1.0 1.8 1.3 22.1
3 27.9 34.7 3.0 13.5 7.2 1.6 2.4 2.5 1.5 6.6
4 23.2 38.0 3.0 14.3 11.9 1.0 1.4 0.9 1.8 4.7
5 22.1 42.3 3.0 14.4 8.8 1.0 2.2 1.1 1.2 3.8
6 27.7 35.8 3.0 11.5 7.6 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 7.1
7 27.7 41.1 3.2 14.4 10.2 0.6 1.3 1.4
8 26.7 42.5 3.1 15.0 10.3 0.5 1.9

13
2414 Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423

Fig. 15  EDS analysis of bis-

muth particle found in a solidi-
fication crack in UNS S32205
welded with 2209T0-B

Fig. 16  a High-resolution
STEM image in ADF mode of
a FIB lamella across a bismuth
particle found in UNS S32205
welded with 2209T0-B and b
the bismuth particle in higher
magnification

Fig. 17  EDS mapping of the bismuth particle in UNS S32205 welded with 2209T0-B (wt.-%)

13
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423 2415

Fig. 18  UNS S32205 welded with 2209T0-B. EDS line analysis over the grain boundary from the weld metal FeCr (matrix) to the bismuth parti-
cle a image in HAADF mode with location of line scan indicated by an arrow and b EDS line scan spectrum

Fig. 19  a HR-STEM image of a bismuth particle in UNS S32205 welded with wire 2209T0-B and location of further analysis. Smaller particles
were visible in b ADF mode and c in HAADF mode

Fig. 20  EDS mapping and line

analysis over a particle in the
bismuth matrix in UNS S32205
welded with wire 2209T0-B
a HAADF image with line
scan location and b line scan
spectrum

13
2416
Fig. 21  EDS profile across
a smaller particle within the
larger bismuth particle in UNS
S32205 welded with wire
2209T0-B a HAADF image
with line scan location and b
line scan spectrum
sample completely failed, none of the indications had a
size exceeding 2 mm. This is in agreement with the crack
length of 0.2–1.9  mm measured with LOM and SEM.
The majority of the cracks were, however, smaller than
1.0 mm. Cardoso Junior et al. [37] also found discontinui-
ties smaller than 1.0 mm in FCAW performed using an
E2307T1 wire. It should be noted that although the met-
allographic investigation mostly confirmed hot cracks for
the susceptible wires, the cross-section is rather arbitrary.
It is possible to identify continuous cracks, but also likely
that shorter cracks are not detected.
The cracks found in this work are not expected to have a
significant influence on the function of the weldments, as all
were rather small, but there are some reasons for concern.
The cracks close to the surface in the fillet welds could, for
instance, lead to a premature failure in applications subject
to fatigue loads and in cases where the surface is ground in
fabrication; these could serve as initiation points for both
corrosion and fatigue. Although the cracks were of minor
size, it is possible that the welding procedure qualification
testing of affected wires would fail if sidewall bend test-
ing would be performed. This was also the case for the
2209T0-A wire, where the complete sample broke. In addi-
tion, the highest demands set on impact toughness may not
be fulfilled and if corrosion testing is required, the cracks
could serve as initiation points for pitting attack, where the
end grains are exposed to the corrosive media. Hence, the
goal should be to select a wire and procedure resulting in
crack-free weldments.
4.2 Weld metal composition, ferrite content
and cracking
The ferrite content decreased with each weld layer due to
austenite growth and formation of secondary austenite. This
was expected as the filler wires used were over-alloyed in
nickel and each succeeding run reheats the previous pass(es),
which serves as a local annealing of the weld metal close to
13
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423
the fusion boundary. The last weld bead showed the high-
est ferrite content as it was not reheated. All solidification
cracks found were located in ferrite grain boundaries envel-
oped by austenite. Some were located in areas with fairly
high ferrite fractions and others in regions with evident
growth of grain boundary austenite, Widmanstätten austen-
ite, and formation of secondary austenite.
An average ferrite content outside the 35–65% limit set
for the phase analysis in for instance NORSOK M-601 [38]
may affect the mechanical properties and corrosion perfor-
mance. Use of pure ­CO2 as shielding gas is known to lead
to a slight increase in weld metal austenite content [39, 40].
The wire welded with 100% C ­ O2 (wire 2209T0-B) was on
the borderline with 34 ± 5%. It is generally accepted, how-
ever, that the ferrite content is not a property itself, but
should serve as an indication of the effect on the corrosion
performance and mechanical properties. To set a lower limit
for the phase balance based on the susceptibility to solidifi-
cation cracking would here not make sense, as the average
ferrite content of UNS S32101 welded with 2307T0 was
45 ± 6%, which is well within the requirements of the phase
balance for duplex stainless steels.
UNS S32205 welded with wire 2209T0-A showed
cracks in the upper half of the V-joint. The cracks were
0.3–1.1-mm-long and, contrary to cracks observed for the
other wires, mostly located in the lower part of each weld
pass starting at a distance of 0.05–0.10 mm from the fusion
line. This confirms that they were solidification and not
liquation cracks. The fracture surface examined with SEM/
EDS confirmed dendritic solidification and bismuth was
found at the tip of the cracks. The austenite content increased
with more layers and all cracks were located in the upper
part of the weldment. The cracks were, however, distributed
in both ferrite-rich and austenite-rich regions. Hence, it is
more likely that the increased strain and buildup of higher
concentrations of certain elements and impurities with addi-
tional weld beads would be the main reason for cracking
rather than the change in microstructure and morphology.
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423
Westin and Hertzman [41] have through EPMA mapping
of UNS S32101 welds shown that there exist a depletion
of silicon, molybdenum, nickel, and manganese along the
fusion line and a corresponding enrichment of the same ele-
ments in the adjacent weld metal. Both zones were about
0.03 mm wide. This was suggested to be the effect of the
epitaxial ferritic solidification. Savage et al. [42] showed
planar-to-cellular growth transition in a 49% nickel-
alloy welded with the GTAW process. Kou [6] reported
a 0.05-mm-wide planar solidification in 1100 Al welded
with 4047 filler, before cellular and dendritic solidifica-
tion occurs. With increasing constitutional undercooling,
the planar growth continues as cellular growth [43] and
when the growth rate becomes critically high, the planar
solid–liquid interface becomes unstable. Enrichment of the
same elements in the weld metal adjacent to the depleted
zone persists and from here, the solidification continues as
columnar dendritic growth. If the concentration of bismuth
and impurity elements, e.g., sulfur, phosphorous, and boron,
in the weld performed with wire 2209T0-A was high, the
change from planar to dendritic growth and enriched zone
may have served as crack initiation. It is possible that the
concentration of the crack promoting elements increase with
additional weld beads.
It should be mentioned that an E2209T1-4/1 wire from
the same manufacturer welded with similar parameter set-
tings passed the sidewall bend test without any indications,
but that the workshop engineer who performed the welding
procedure qualification solved the problem by selecting an
E2209T0-4/1 wire from another supplier. All these wires
were intentionally alloyed with an unknown amount of bis-
muth for improved slag removal, but the all position wire
probably contained less than half as much bismuth as the
downhand wires.
4.3 Scanning electron microscopy
The typical dendritic solidification pattern on the fracture
surfaces is the result of liquid films having a lower melting
point than the rest of the weld and the thermal strain associ-
ated with welding that opens up the melt into a crack [44]. In
all examined cracks in this work, a transition could be found
from the dendritic-flat to flat hot crack features (Fig. 22a–c).
This is in agreement with the observations made by Matsuda
et al. [13, 45, 46] who divided the fracture surface mor-
phology of hot cracks formed in fully austenitic SUS 310S
and fully ferritic SUS 430 into the three different regions;
dendritic, dendritic-flat, and flat, while the austenitic SUS
304 only showed dendritic morphology. The solidification
was suggested go from dendritic to flat as the temperature
decreased and the size of the smooth area increased with
strain and strain rate.
2417
Bismuth was easiest visualized with SEM using back-
scatter mode, in which it becomes brighter than the matrix.
The element was for all samples present in the flat region,
but could also be found in dendrite valleys and dimples sur-
rounding the crack tip.
4.4 Auger electron spectroscopy
Small holes were observed on the surface of the flat surface
of the crack in 2209T0-B (Fig. 13b). Matsuda et al. [45, 46]
reported a similar appearance for the fully austenitic SUS
310S where the surface was smooth with a number of small
holes. These were concluded to be the result of non-metallic
inclusions.
The Auger electron spectroscopy (AES) analysis showed
significant amounts of oxygen and carbon, which was not
in full agreement with the results from SEM/EDS, where
the bismuth fraction was around 80 wt.-%. As the Auger
technique is considerably more surface sensitive and only
measuring a few atom layers, and the samples were not ana-
lyzed immediately after opening the crack, it is believed that
contamination of the surface has taken place. The layer of
carbon and oxygen could not be removed despite repeating
the conventional cleaning procedure.
A double peak of bismuth was found with at 96–100 eV
for all analyzed spots in Table 5. This is well in agreement
with other AES work on bismuth and different bismuth com-
pounds stating that the most intense bismuth Auger signal
is found around 100 eV [47–51]. A majority of the analyses
also showed weaker peaks at 261–263 eV and 265–269 eV.
Other research work has shown similar results. Otalora et al.
[52] studied thin films of bismuth and ­Bi2O3 compositions
with AES. Pure bismuth was found to have peaks at 101.7,
247.2, and 267.0 eV, while B ­ i2O3 showed peaks at 101.2,
247.6, and 268.4 eV. Jovalekic et al. [48] investigated bis-
muth titanate ceramics obtained by sintering from B ­ i 2O 3
and ­TiO2 oxides. The most intense bismuth Auger signal
appeared at 100 eV, while two weaker bismuth peaks were
found at 249 eV and 268 eV, respectively. Marie et al. [50]
investigated liquid metal embrittlement of nickel and found
a double peak at 99–103 eV and a peak at approximately
262–263 eV. Konosu et al. [51] studied welds performed
with austenitic stainless flux-core wires of 308 type con-
taining ­Bi2O3 alloying for improved slag removal. AES was
used to reveal bismuth segregation at the grain boundaries
of crack surfaces after heat treatment. Bismuth peaks were
found at approximately 100 and 261 eV.
4.5 High‑resolution scanning transmission electron
microscopy (HR‑STEM)
A FIB sample of a bismuth particle found in a solidifica-
tion crack on the fracture surface with 2209T0-B was
13
2418
Fig. 22  Fracture surface of
L-joint welded with 2209T0-B
a overview, b higher magnifi-
cation with dendritic flat start
(lower part of the image) and
flat surface (upper part of the
image), and c particles observed
at the end of the flat region (last
solidified melt)
investigated by means of HR-STEM. Bismuth was primarily
found deep in the dendritic structure or on the side flanks of
dendrites, which made it challenging to prepare samples for
investigation. As the instrument operated with two detectors,
any larger difference in surface topography with steep flanks
hindered one of the detectors. With FIB, it was possible to
isolate a single particle in a dendrite valley for examination,
but the first sample oxidized quickly, and it was concluded
that it was important to immediately store the sample in
vacuum until inserting it into the HR-STEM.
As the sample posed its own magnetic field, the Cs-
corrector element had to be manually optimized for atomic
resolution and an aberration-free zone of 26 mrad at 300 kV
was reached with a 50 µm condenser aperture. The beam
convergence was finally set at 19.6 mrad. The bismuth parti-
cle had a composition of 65Bi-10Pb-10P-10S-5Fe with some
traces of carbon and oxygen, which may also be a result
of contamination and oxidation. The conductive platinum
layer intentionally deposited also contained carbon. Opti-
cally, the bismuth particle consisted of two different parts,
but the chemical composition of the bismuth matrix was
identical. Within the bismuth particle, several nanoparticles
were visualized by various HR-STEM modes. On one side,
the nanoparticles were small and on the other, there were
larger clusters. This is believed to be related to diffusion and
a function of the cooling rate. Two smaller particles ana-
lyzed showed a slightly modified composition with higher
influence of the other trace elements with 41Bi-20Pb-19S-
11P-9Fe and 52Bi-17S-14Pb-10P-7Fe, respectively. FFT dif-
fraction patterns confirmed the difference between the larger
bismuth and the nanoparticles (Fig. 23a, b).
13
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423
4.6 Bismuth
Bismuth is intentionally added in the flux-cored wires for
improved surface appearance and slag detachability [53].
Starting with the mid 90  s, it became known that bis-
muth could cause intergranular cracking and premature
creep failure in austenitic welds after a period of service
at 650–825 °C [47, 51, 54–57]. For this reason, bismuth-
free wires are recommended for high temperature service or
PWHT above 500 °C [56–59]. In 2012, it became manda-
tory in AWS A5.22 [58] to report the content if bismuth is
intentionally added, or if it is known to be present at levels
greater than 0.002%. For the wires manufactured in 2005
and 2011, there were consequently no information on the
weld metal bismuth-content, but the wire 2209T0-B con-
tained 0.0058 wt.-%.
The maximum service temperature for duplex stainless
steels is mostly set at 250 °C and for this low temperature,
no negative influence of bismuth on cracking sensitivity has
been reported. It is, however, known that additions of bis-
muth oxide, ­Bi2O3, have a measurable somewhat negative
effect on the impact toughness in austenitics by increasing
the oxide content and resultant oxide inclusions [47, 56,
57, 60]. Ogawa et al. [61] have suggested that bismuth in
duplex flux-cored wires has a negative impact on the cor-
rosion resistance. The mechanism behind was not clarified,
but the authors recommended that the use of bismuth should
be limited to 0.015 wt.-%. As the ASTM G48 pitting corro-
sion test also exposes the end grains to the ­FeCl3 solution,
small solidification cracks of the type found in this work may
serve as initiation points for pitting and add to the measured
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423
Fig. 23  Diffraction pattern for a
the bismuth particle matrix and
b nano-particle within larger
bismuth particle (live FFT on
HAADF)
weight loss. Sugahara et al. [62] stated that preferably the
use of ­Bi2O3 should be limited to 0.005 wt.-% in duplex
stainless steel flux-cored wires, but no reason was given why
this limit was chosen.
It was possible to locate bismuth in the crack tip on
polished cross-sections in BSE mode by means of SEM
(Fig.  10a) and by subsequent etching to reveal that the
cracks were present in the primary ferrite grain boundaries
(Fig. 10b). When examining fracture surfaces containing
cracks, the part of the crack closest to the surface showed
dendritic or dendritic-flat solidification, but nearer to the
crack tip, it turned flat. The bismuth particles were primarily
located in the flat region or in the dimples in the surrounding
area. The EDS spectra all showed some carbon and oxy-
gen contents indicating that there was some surface con-
tamination or oxidation. The carbon peak was considerably
more prominent than the oxygen peak, which means that
the oxygen content was not sufficiently high to indicate that
bismuth was present as bismuth oxide ­Bi2O3. As no clear
correlation with oxygen could be found, this indicates that
bismuth was present in its pure form and not as oxide [51,
60]. This is of importance as the melting point for bismuth
oxide ­Bi2O3 is 830 °C, while pure bismuth melts already
at 270 °C [51]. This could prolong the solidification crack-
ing temperature range for a susceptible material. Bismuth-
induced hot cracking has not been reported for stainless
steels, but it has long been known that impurities such as
lead and bismuth can segregate at the grain and solidifica-
tion boundaries and thereby decrease the hot workability of
austenitic stainless steels [49, 63–70]. In this work, however,
no signs of liquation cracking could be observed. Step-wise
welding as described by Valiente Bermejo et al. [71] with
wire 2209T0-B showed that all cracks were already present
in the underlaying weld beads.
The exact bismuth content of 2307T0 is unknown, but the
formulist who at this time worked for the manufacturer pro-
ducing the wire has confirmed that rather large additions of
2419
­Bi2O3 were used as the main focus was surface appearance
and not impact toughness. The two E2209T0-4/1 wires, on
the other hand, contained according to the formulists bis-
muth additions in the form of BiMn to minimize the poten-
tial drop in impact toughness. The type of ore and source
of the raw materials may play a role, as unwanted additions
may unexpectedly originate from the strip material, powder
metals and slag formers [65]. The bismuth particle inves-
tigated with STEM, for instance, contained a considerable
amount of lead, phosphorous and sulfur.
4.7 Effect of impurities in flux‑cored wires
Japanese scientists [23, 45, 72–75] published a series of
papers on hot cracking sensitivity of fully austenitic stain-
less steel. The authors found sulfides on the fracture sur-
faces with SEM and suggested to limit the sulfur content
to 0.005–0.010 wt.-%. Sulfur strongly contributes to the
low-melting, impurity enriched liquid films responsible for
solidification cracking [7]. Although it is well-known that
sulfur and phosphorous are negative for the hot cracking
resistance, these elements can rarely be avoided in flux-cored
wires due to some amounts in the strip material, but also as
minor contamination of other raw materials. Sulfur is, in
addition, affecting the weld bead penetration, fluidity of the
weld metal and possibly the slag detachability. The sulfur
content of the wires in this work was 0.007–0.011 wt.-%,
which would be somewhat higher than what is recommended
in the literature [74, 76]. Additionally, 2307T0 contained
higher amounts of titanium and aluminum, 2209T0-A more
tin and antimony, and 2209T0-B more cobalt and boron than
the other wires. Titanium and cobalt are not typical elements
forming low-melting phases, but the elements were located
in a few locations in cracks analyzed with SEM/EDS. Nor-
mally, none of the trace elements tellurium, antimony, tin,
and arsenic are listed on the certificate from the manufac-
turer and probably also not included in the typical analysis
13
2420
from the accredited laboratory measuring the all-weld metal
composition unless extra specifying it when placing the
order. Moreover, the accuracy and reproducibility of the
chemical analysis of impurities and trace elements may vary
between different laboratories [77].
Kou [44] stated that the risk for solidification cracking
is determined by the solidification temperature range, the
amount and distribution of liquid at the terminal stage of
solidification, the surface tension of the grain-boundary liq-
uid, the ductility of solidifying weld metal, and the tendency
to weld metal contraction and the degree of restraint. In this
work, plates were fully restrained, which increases the sus-
ceptibility of the weld metal. The chemical composition with
especially bismuth and sulfur is suggested to have contrib-
uted to the solidification cracking by forming low melting
phases concentrated in the grain boundaries. These would
still have been liquid when subject to the strain formed in
the weldment. The long and straight ferrite grain bounda-
ries allow propagation of cracks once initiated [13, 14]. It
should be noted that the susceptibility may also be highly
related to the slag system and slag solidification rate as an
E2209T1 wire from the same, and an E2209T0 wire from
another manufacturer, were considered resistant. This will be
discussed more in Part 2 of this paper series [78]. The next
work will also compare modern wires from different manu-
facturers as they most certainly have different slag concepts
and use various methods to optimize the weldability of the
wires [79].
5 Conclusions
Three duplex stainless steel flux-cored wires have been
reported to cause solidification cracking in 30-mm-thick
duplex stainless steel when welding under full restraint. In
this work, welded plates have been examined to confirm
cracking susceptibility and the following conclusions could
be drawn:
No cracks were detected in the as-welded condition using
conventional NDT techniques, but 0.2–1.9-mm-long cracks
were visible in polished (and etched) cross-sections and on
fracture surfaces after destructive testing. As hardly any of
the cracks were surface breaking, the sidewall bend test com-
bined with examination of fracture surfaces proved to be
most efficient for detection.
Fracture surfaces examined with SEM showed dendritic
solidification, which confirmed that the phenomenon observed
was hot cracking. The solidification mode, however, showed
a clear transition from dendritic-flat to flat. At the crack tip of
the last solidified melt, particles could be seen and these were
confirmed by EDS to consist of primarily bismuth. Especially
in backscatter mode, the bismuth could efficiently be visualized
13
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423
as a bright phase. Manganese sulfide, MnS, was also observed,
indicating substantial amounts of sulfur on the crack surface.
The cracks were located in the grain boundaries and are
suggested to have been caused by low-melting phases still
being liquid when the weldment was exposed to the critical
strain. Once initiated, the propagation occurred in the long
and straight ferrite grain boundaries. Sulfur and bismuth are
two elements of concern, but more work is needed to con-
firm if the cracking resistance increases by reduction of these
elements. It may be possible to improve the weldability by
optimizing the chemical composition and the solidification
range of the slag.
Acknowledgements  The authors want to thank the involved welding
companies, distributors, and filler wire producers for sharing their
experience with solidification cracking in duplex welds and for pro-
viding sensitive flux-cored wires, base materials, and already welded
plates and images of cracks. Dr. Stefan Mitsche at FELMI-ZFE con-
tributed with SEM/EDS work, Dr. Anton Holy with LOM and SEM/
EDS measurements, Dr. Mihaela Albu at FELMI-ZFE performed the
HR-STEM investigations and Prof. David Stifter at Johannes Kepler
University (JKU) carried out the AES work. Prof. Norbert Enzinger at
TU Graz served as supervisor of Dipl.-Ing. Andrea Putz and together
with Dr. Thomas Willidal at voestalpine Böhler Welding, he was part of
the Competence Headquarter Fülldraht project team. Yngve Axelsson
at Jernkontoret, Sweden, provided some of the older papers and reports.
Prof. Carl E. Cross at Los Alamos National Laboratory is acknowl-
edged for valuable comments on the script.
Author contribution  Dr. Elin Marianne Westin performed the exami-
nation for two of the wires, did the literature review, and wrote the
paper. Dipl.-Ing. Andrea Putz led the examination of the third wire
and created the methodology for investigations on characterization of
hot cracks and the existence of bismuth particles by means of AES
and STEM. Ing. Andrea Maderthoner studied the potential effect of
individual flux components on solidification cracking and performed
the NDT work. Dr. Johan Pilhagen evaluated the fracture surfaces of
one of the wires with SEM. All authors have read and agreed to the
published version of the manuscript.
Funding  The work of Dipl.-Ing. Andrea Putz was financed by Die
Österreichischer Forschungsförderungsgesellschaft FFG “Competence
Headquarter Fülldraht”.
Declarations 
Conflict of interest  The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Nelson DE, Baeslack WA III, Lippold JC (1987) An investigation
of weld hot cracking in duplex stainless steels. Weld J Res Suppl
66(8):241s–250s
2. Arata Y, Matsuda F, Saruwatari S (1974) Varestraint test for solid-
ification crack susceptibility in weld metal of austenitic stainless
steels. Trans JWRI 3(1):79–88. http://​hdl.​handle.​net/​11094/​3695.
Accessed 28 Dec 2021
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423
3. Lippold JC, Kiser SD, DuPont JN (2011) Welding metallurgy and
weldability of nickel-base alloys. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 456pp.
ISBN: 978–1–118–21003–1
4. Lippold JC (2014) Welding metallurgy and weldability. John
Wiley & Sons, Inc. 400pp. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​97811​18960
332
5. Cross CE, Böllinghaus T (2016) The effect on restraint on weld
solidification cracking in aluminum. Weld World 50(11/12):51–
54. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​BF032​63461
6. Kou S (2003) Welding metallurgy. Second edition. John Wiley &
Sons, Inc. ISBN: 0–471–43491–4. 480pp.
7. Varol I, Baeslack WA III, Lippold JC (1992) Welding of duplex
stainless steels. Key Eng Mater 69–70(1):217–251. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​4028/​www.​scien​tific.​net/​KEM.​69-​70.​217
8. Thomas Thomas M, Vollert F, Weidemann J, Gibmeier J, Kromm
A, Kannengießer T (2020) Surface- and volume-based investiga-
tion on influences of different Varestraint testing parameters and
chemical compositions on solidification cracking in LTT filler
metals. Weld World 64(5):913–923. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​
s40194-​020-​00895-2
9. Lippold JC, Kotecki DJ (2005): Welding metallurgy and weld-
ability of stainless steels. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New Jersey.
376pp. ISBN: 978–0–471–47379–4
10. Prokhorov N (1962) The technological strength of metals while
crystallizing during welding. Weld Prod 9(4):1–8
11. Brooks JA, Lambert FJ Jr (1978) The effects of phosphorous,
sulfur and ferrite content on weld cracking of type 309 stainless
steel. Weld J Res Suppl 57(5):2139s-s2143
12. Shankar VG, Gill TPS, Mannan SL, Sundaresan S (2003) Solid-
ifcation cracking in austenitic stainless steel welds. Sadhana
28(3–4):359–382
13. Matsuda F, Nakagawa H, Uehara T, Katayama S, Arata Y (1979)
A new explanation for role of delta-ferrite improving weld solidi-
fication cracks susceptibility in austenitic stainless steel. Trans-
actions of JWRI 8(1):105–112. http://​hdl.​handle.​net/​11094/​5579.
Accessed on June 19, 2022
14. Katayama S, Fujimoto T, Matsunawa A (1985) Correlation among
solidification process, microstructure, microsegregation and
solidification cracking susceptibility in stainless steel weld met-
als (materials, metallurgy & weldability). Transactions of JWRI
14(1):123–138. http://​hdl.​handle.​net/​11094/​10942. Accessed on
June 19, 2022
15. Hull FC (1967) Effects of delta ferrite on the hot cracking of stain-
less steel. Weld J Res Suppl 46(9):399s–409s
16. Matsuda F, Nakagawa H, Kato I, Murata Y (1986) Solidification
crack susceptibility in weld metals of duplex stainless steels. Trans
JWRI 15(1):99–112. http://h​ dl.h​ andle.n​ et/1​ 1094/1​ 0729. Accessed
28 Dec 2021
17. Kujanpää V, Suutala N, Takalo T, Moisio T (1979) Correlation
between solidification cracking and microstructure in austenitic
and austenitic-ferritic stainless steel. Weld Res Int 9(2):55–76
18. Takalo T, Suutala N, Moisio T (1979) Austenitic solidification
mode in austenitic stainless steel welds. Metall Trans 10(8):1173–
1181. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​BF028​11663
19. Varol I, Baeslack WA III, Lippold JC (1989) Characterization of
weld solidification cracking in a duplex stainless steel. Metallog-
raphy 23(1):1–19. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/0​ 026-0​ 800(89)9​ 0037-2
20. Castro R, de Cadenet JJ (1974) Welding metallurgy of stainless
and heat-resisting steels. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
ISBN: 9780521204316Saida K, Ogura T (2018) Hot cracking
susceptibility in duplex stainless steel welds. Mater Sci Forum
941(12):679–685. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4028/​www.​scien​tific.​net/​
MSF.​941.​679
21. Saida K, Ogura T (2018) Hot cracking susceptibility in duplex
stainless steel welds. Mater Sci Forum 941(12):679–685. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​4028/​www.​scien​tific.​net/​MSF.​941.​679
2421
22. Cross CE, Coniglio N, Westin EM, Gumenyuk A (2011) Laser
weldability of stainless steel. Hot cracking phenomena in welds
III. Springer-Verlag Berlin and Heidelberg GmbH & Co. K, Ber-
lin, pp 131–144
23. Arata Y, Matsuda F, Katayama S (1976) Solidification crack
susceptibility in weld metals of fully austenitic stainless steels
(Report I): fundamental investigation on solidification behavior
of fully austenitic and duplex microstructures and effect of ferrite
on microsegregation. Transactions of JWRI 5(2):35–51. http://h​ dl.​
handle.​net/​11094/​7813. Accessed on June 19, 2022
24. Suutala N, Takalo T, Moisio T (1979) Austenitic solidifica-
tion mode in austenitic stainless steel welds. Metall Trans A
10(8):1183–1190. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​BF028​11664
25. Gooch TG (1983) Weldability of duplex ferritic-austenitic stain-
less steels. Proc. Duplex Stainless Steels ‘82. St Louis, Mo, ASM,
Metals Park, Ohio, Paper 8201–029:573–602
26. Honeycombe J, Gooch TG (1977) Intergranular attack in welded
stress-corrosion resistant stainless steel. Weld J Res Suppl
56(11):339s–353s
27. Karlsson L (2012) Welding duplex stainless steels—a review of
current recommendations. Weld World 56(3):65–76. https://​doi.​
org/​10.​1007/​BF033​21351
28. Fellman A, Westin EM (2008) Fiber laser hybrid welding of stain-
less steels. Proc. I­ CALEO® Congress Materials Processing Con-
ference, Temecula, CA. LIA, Paper #1204:545–553
29. Ogawa T, Koseki T (1989) Effect of composition profiles on
metallurgy and corrosion behavior of duplex stainless steel weld
metals. Weld J Res Suppl 68(5):181s–191s. http://​files.​aws.​org/​
wj/​suppl​ement/​WJ_​1989_​05_​s181.​pdf
30. Coniglio N, Cross CE (2013) Initiation and growth mechanism for
weld solidification cracking. Int Mat Rev 58(7):375–397. https://​
doi.​org/​10.​1179/​17432​80413Y.​00000​00020
31. Coniglio N, Cross CE (2009) Mechanisms for solidification crack
initiation and growth in aluminum welding. Metall Mater Trans A
40(11):2718–2728. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s11661-​009-​9964-4
32. Liljas M (1995) The welding metallurgy of duplex stainless steels,
Proc. Duplex Stainless Steels '94, Glasgow, Scotland, Vol. 2:Paper
KV:15pp.
33. Kou S (2015) A simple index for predicting the susceptibility to
solidification cracking. Weld J 94(12):374s–388s
34. Westin EM (2022) Hot cracking in duplex stainless steel weld-
ments—a review. Weld World 66(8):1483–1499, 1501–1502.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40194-​022-​01310-8; https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1007/​s40194-​022-​01310-8
35. Sieurin H (2006) Fracture toughness properties of duplex stainless
steels. Doctoral thesis. Royal University of Technology, KTH,
School of Industrial Engineering and Management (ITM), Mate-
rials Science and Engineering Stockholm, Sweden, pp 46. http://​
www.​diva-​portal.​org/​smash/​get/​diva2:​10204/​FULLT​EXT01.​pdf.
Accessed 27 Dec 2021
36. ASME IX (2019) ASME boiler and pressure vessel code, Sec-
tion IX: welding and brazing qualifications. American Society of
Mechanical Engineering. 422pp. ISBN 9780791872901
37. Cardoso Junior R, Bracarense AQ, Campos FR, Souza CS, Sil-
veira DM, Lins VFC (2012) Evaluation of multipass welding
of thick lean duplex stainless steel UNS S32304 plates welded
by SMAW, GMAW and FCAW – Part 1: Mechanical Properties.
Soldag Insp 17(4):306–316 (in Portuguese). https://​doi.​org/​10.​
1590/​S0104-​92242​01200​04000​05
38. Norway S (2008) Norsok standard M-601 welding and inspec-
tion of piping. Lysaker, Norway, pp 24
39. Kah P, Martikainen J (2013) Influence of shielding gases in the
welding of metals. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 64(2):1411–1421.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s00170-​012-​4111-6
40. Morozova J, Bonnel J-M, Rosert R, Ossenbrink R, Michailov V
(2019) Influence of the welding position during flux cored arc
13
2422
welding on impact toughness of stainless and low alloy steel
weld metals. DVS Berichte Band 355:310–318 (in German).
ISBN 978–3–96144–066–5
41. Westin EM, Hertzman S (2014) Element distribution in lean
duplex stainless steel welds. Weld World 58(3/4):143–160.
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40194-​013-​0108-5
42. Savage WF, Nippes EF, Erickson JS (1976) Solidification mech-
anisms in fusion welds. Weld J 55(8):213s–221s
43. Savage WF, Lundin CD, Aronson AH (1965) Weld metal solidi-
fication mechanics Weld J 44(4):175–181s
44. Kou S (2003) Solidification and liquation cracking issues
in welding. JOM 55(6):37–42. https:// ​ d oi. ​ o rg/ ​ 1 0. ​ 1 007/​
s11837-​003-​0137-4
45. Arata Y, Matsuda F, Nakagawa H, Katayama S, Ogata S (1977)
Solidification crack susceptibility in weld metals of fully auste-
nitic stainless steels (Report III): effect of strain rate on cracking
threshold in weld metal during solidification. Transactions of
JWRI 6(2):37–46. http://​hdl.​handle.​net/​11094/​9667. Accessed
on June 19, 2022
46. Matsuda F, Nakagawa H, Ogata S, Katayama S (1978) Inves-
tigation on solidification crack in the Varestraint test of fully
austenitic stainless steel – studies on fractography of welded
zone (III). Transactions of JWRI 7(1):59–70. http://​hdl.​handle.​
net/​11094/​10586. Accessed on June 19, 2022
47. Tsukimoto K, Tozoda M, Marsumoto O, Kawaguchi S (1998)
Effect of elements on weldability and hot ductility of FCAW
stainless steel weld metal. Weld World 41(3):240–252. Perga-
mon Press. ISSN: 0043–2288
48. Jovelekic C, Zdujic M, Atanasoska LJ (2009) Surface analysis
of bismuth titanate by Auger and X-ray photoelectron spectros-
copy. J Alloys Compd 469:441–444. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
jallc​om.​2008.​01.​131
49. Walsh JM, Anderson NP (1976) Characterization of nickel-
base superalloy fracture surfaces by Auger electron spectros-
copy. Proc. Superalloys Seven Springs Conference, AIME/
TMS:127–136
50. Marie N, Wolski K, Biscodi M (2000) Grain boundary penetra-
tion of nickel by liquid bismuth as a film of nanometric thick-
ness. Scripta Mater 43(10):943–949. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​
S1359-​6462(00)​00518-2
51. Konosu S, Hashimoto A, Mashiba H, Takeshima M, Ohtsuka T
(1998) Crack growth properties of type 308 austenitic stainless
steel weld metals. Weld J 77(8):322s–327s
52. Otalora DM, Orozco G, Olaya-Florez JJ (2015) Microestructura
y propiedades opticas de peliculas de bismuto y oxide de bis-
muto depositadas son magnetron desbalanceado. Rev Acad
Colomb Cienc Ex Fis Nat 39(159):18–25. https://​doi.​org/​10.​
18257/​racce​fyn.​119 (in Spanish)
53. Farrar JCM, Marshall AW, Zhang Z (2001) Position statement
on the effect of bismuth on the elevated temperature prop-
erties of flux cored stainless steel weldments. Weld World
45(5/6):25–31
54. Chemical Plant Welding Research Committee of the Japan Engi-
neering Society (JWES) (1996) High temperature damage to stain-
less steel welds made by flux-cored arc welding and its analysis.
Proc. API 61th Fall Refinery Meeting, pp. 21–23
55. Nishiyama S, Matushita Y, Maruyama T (1995) Flux-cored
wires for stainless steel welding. Weld World 36(6):103–123.
Pergamon Press. ISSN: 0043–2288
56. Hara Y, Shiga K, Nakazawa N (1996) High temperature damage
to stainless steel welds made by flux cored arc welding and its
analysis. Proc. API 61st Full Refinery Meeting, Houston, TX
57. Nishimoto K, Matsunaga T, Tanaka T, Okazaki T (1998) Effect
of bismuth on reheat cracking susceptibility in type 308 FCAW
weld metal. Weld World 41(3):220–235. Pergamon Press. ISSN:
0043–2288
13
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423
58. AWS A5.22/A5.22M:2012. Specification for stainless steel
flux cored and metal cored welding electrodes and rods. A8.1.4
Bismuth (Bi) in flux cored stainless steel electrodes. American
Welding Society, Miami, pp 55
59. American Petroleum Institute Recommended Practice, API RP
582 (2009) Welding guidelines for the chemical, oil, and gas
industries, 2nd edn. American Petroleum Institute, Washington,
DC, pp 14
60. Westin EM, Schnitzer R, Ciccomascolo F, Maderthoner A, Grön-
lund K, Runnsjö G (2016) Austenitic stainless steel bismuth-free
flux-cored wires for high-temperature applications. Weld World
60(6):1147–1158. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40194-​016-​0376-y
61. Ogawa T, Maruyama T, Ozaki S (2002) Flux cored wire for weld-
ing duplex stainless steel. United States Patent US 6,340,396 B1.
12pp.
62. Sugahara H, Ikeda T, Watanabe H (2010) Flux-cored wire for
stainless steel arc welding. United States Patent Application Pub-
lication US 2011/0139761 A1. 9pp.
63. Myllykoski L, Suutala N (1983) Effect of solidification mode on
hot ductility of austenitic stainless steels. Met Technol 10(1):453–
460. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1179/​03071​69838​03291​307
64. Melford DA (1980) The influence of residual and trace elements
on hot shortness and high temperature embrittlement. Phil Trans
R Soc Lond A 295(1413):89–101
65. Jensfeld PM, Norrman TO (1962) Bismuth and its effect on hot
workability of stainless steel. Jernkontor Annlr 146(6):438–452
66. Ljungström LG (1977) Influence of trace elements on the hot duc-
tility of austenitic 17Cr13NiMo-steel. Scand J Metall 6:176–184
67. Norström L-Å (1979) A comment on the influence of trace ele-
ments on the hot ductility of austenitic 17Cr 13Ni Mo-steel. Scand
J Metall 8(2):95–96
68. Skoglund E (1979) Inverkan av föroreningar på rostfria ståls varm-
bearbetbarhet. Jernkontorets forskningsuppgift, Internal report JK
493/73 (in Swedish)
69. Tehovnik F, Vodopivec F, Celin R, Arzenše B, Gontarev B (2011)
Effect of δ-ferrite, lead and sulphur on hot workability of austen-
itic stainless steels with solidification structure. Materi Sci Tech-
nol 2(4):774–782. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1179/​02670​8311X​12916​
29142​4272
70. Bergh S (1949) Influence of lead on behavior of stainless steel.
Iron Age 164(14/7):96–99; Met Rev 22(9):32
71. Valiente Bermejo MA, Hurtig K, Eyzop D, Karlsson L (2019) A
new approach to the study of multi-pass welds – microstructure
and properties of welded 20-mm-thick superduplex stainless steel.
Appl Sci 9(1050):18. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​app90​61050
72. Arata Y, Matsuda F, Katayama S (1977) Solidification crack
susceptibility in weld metals of fully austenitic stainless steels
(Report II): effect of ferrite, P, S, C, Si and Mn on ductility proper-
ties of solidification brittleness. Trans JWRI 6(1):105–116. http://​
hdl.​handle.​net/​11094/​8229. Accessed 19 June 2022
73. Arata Y, Matsuda F, Nakagawa H, Katayama S (1978) Solidifica-
tion crack susceptibility in weld metals of fully austenitic stainless
steels (Report IV): effect of decreasing P and S on solidification
crack susceptibility of SUS 310S austenitic stainless steel weld
metals. Transactions of JWRI 7(2):21–24. http://​hdl.​handle.​net/​
11094/​6740. Accessed on June 19, 2022
74. Matsuda F, Katayama S, Arata Y (1981) Solidification crack
susceptibility in weld metals of fully austenitic stainless steels
(Report V): Solidification crack susceptibility and amount of
phosphide and sulphide in SUS 310S weld metals. Transactions of
JWRI 10(2):73–84. http://​hdl.​handle.​net/​11094/​11708. Accessed
on June 19, 2022
75. Matsuda F, Nakagawa H, Katayama S, Arata Y (1982) Solidifica-
tion crack susceptibility in weld metals of fully austenitic stainless
steels (Report VI): effect of La or REM addition on solidification
Welding in the World (2022) 66:2405–2423
crack resistance. Transactions of JWRI 11(1):79–94. http://​hdl.​
handle.​net/​11094/​6079. Accessed on June 19, 2022
76. Yamada K, Hamada M, Motoya D, Nakatsuka S, Amaya H, Tak-
abe H (2013) Process for producing welded joint. European Patent
Specification EP 2 832 487 B1. 24pp.
77. Kotecki DJ (2014) Round robin of trace elements. Weld World
58(4):577–592. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s40194-​014-​0147-6
78. Westin EM, Warchomicka F (2022) Solidification cracking in flux-
cored welding of duplex stainless steel Part 2—cracking in 22Cr
all-weld metal under high restraint. Weld World. https://​doi.​org/​
10.​1007/​s40194-​022-​01389-z
79. Holly S, Mayer P, Bernhard C, Posch G (2018) Slag characteri-
sation of 308L-type stainless steel rutile flux-cored wires. Weld
World 63(2):293–311. https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 007/s​ 40194-0​ 18-0​ 675-6
2423
80. EN ISO 17633 Welding consumables—tubular cored electrodes
and rods for gas shielded and non-gas shielded metal arc welding
of stainless and heat-resisting steels—classification (2018) Euro-
pean Committee for Standardization, Brussels, Belgium. 46pp.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under
a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s);
author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article
is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and
applicable law.
13