Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Engineering Failure Analysis

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/engfailanal

Failure analysis of girth weld cracking of mechanically lined pipe

used in gasfield gathering system
A.Q. Fu a,b,⁎, X.R. Kuang a,b, Y. Han a,b, C.H. Lu a,b, Z.Q. Bai a,b, C.X. Yin a,b, J. Miao a,b, Y.R. Feng a,b,
Y.G. Wei c, Q. Tang c, Y. Yang c
a
Tubular Goods Research Institute, China National Petroleum Corporation, Xi'an 710077, China
b
State Key Laboratory of Performance and Structural Safety for Petroleum Tubular Goods and Equipment Materials, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710077, China
c
Tarim Oilfield Company, PetroChina Company Limited, Korla 841000, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Girth weld cracking of mechanically lined pipe was occurred after 75 days operation in a
Received 28 July 2015 gasfield gathering system in China. Failure causes were analyzed based on operation histories,
Received in revised form 19 May 2016 field documents, and laboratory tests. Results showed that the girth weld failure was mainly
Accepted 22 May 2016
due to two aspects, girth weld martensite microstructure and external stress. The crack was
Available online 25 May 2016
initiated from sealing pass zone and filling pass zone, which is a hard and brittle martensite
structure with hardness of HV 350–450. The failed pipe area had undergone the heavy rain
Keywords: for 2 days, pulling stress, bending stress, and shear stress generated by soil movement resulted
Mechanically lined pipe
in high stress concentration at girth weld. The girth weld cracking failure was initiated from
Girth weld
outer carbon steel, and propagated along the weld-fusion line in intergranular mode, which
Cracking
Martensite is a typical stress corrosion cracking failure.
Stress © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

With the continuously growing demand in oil and gas globally, the common oil and gas reservoir was extensively exploited
and which became less and less. Therefore, high pressure high temperature (HPHT) gas reservoir was increasingly developed
all around the world, the typical HPHT gas well broadly exist in Gulf of Mexico, Tarim Basin of China, North Sea, South East
Asia, Africa and Middle East [1,2]. The nature of HPHT gas reservoir fluids places demands upon material selection for linepipe
that can only be met by the use of corrosion resistant alloys (CRAs) as an internal clad layer combined with a carbon steel sub-
strate [3]. Although the solid CRAs are the best choice with overall desirable properties, the biggest disadvantage is that the CRAs
are too expensive for using as gathering pipes. Hence, development of mechanically lined pipe is an alternative choice with con-
sideration of cost and corrosion resistance. Mechanically lined pipe is composed of external carbon steel pipe and a thin internal
layer of CRA, in which the outer carbon steel is to provide structure strength, and the inner CRA layer is designed to resist cor-
rosion [4,5], as shown in Fig. 1.
Mechanically lined pipe combines the advantages of carbon steel (low cost and high strength) and CRA (high corrosion resis-
tance) together, this combination enables that the mechanically lined pipe was widely used in HPHT gas field gathering systems
and offshore flowlines in subsea gathering systems. Moreover, the liner of mechanically lined pipe can be customized according to
the fluids corrosivity, various liner materials are available for selection, i.e., 304, 316L, 825, 625, G28. Mechanically lined pipe has
been considered as a preferred pipe to replace traditional carbon steel pipe in HPHT gas field gathering systems in China.

⁎ Corresponding author at: Tubular Goods Research Institute, China National Petroleum Corporation, Xi'an 710077, China.
E-mail address: fuanqing@cnpc.com.cn (A.Q. Fu).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2016.05.034
1350-6307/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 A.Q. Fu et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75 65

Fig. 1. The structure of mechanically lined pipe.

Fig. 2. Weld joint of mechanically lined pipe and weld structure.

However, the dissimilar nature of the materials abutting at the weld joint presents challenges in terms of welding processes, flaw
assessment and inspection methods [6], it was found that most of the failures were related to the girth weld cracking and perfo-
ration [3,7,8]. Pipe failures may cause loss of product, temporary shutdown of production, pollution, and other unpredictable
losses. Therefore, it is of significance to decrease the failure risk, failure analysis is one of the best ways to provide failure reason
and prevention measure.
The objective of this work is to analyze the causes about the girth weld cracking failure of mechanically lined pipe used in
northwest China gasfield, although extensive laboratory studies have been done on the girth welding of mechanical lined and
metallurgical clad pipes, i.e., welding procedure, fracture assessment, fatigue behavior, full-scale mechanical test and NDT test
[3,5–9]. Few works were found on the girth welding failure after period of use in oil/gas field, the weld joint of bi-metal pipe
is more complicated than that of single metal pipe, i.e., welding material, welding method, welding parameters, and pre-treatment
process, as shown in Fig. 2. It is expected that this work would provide the insight of mechanically lined pipe girth welding failure
reasons and prevention measures.

Fig. 3. Operation parameters of failed mechanically lined pipe within 75 days.

66 A.Q. Fu et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75

Fig. 4. Failed girth weld of mechanically lined pipe in the field.

Fig. 5. Images of failed girth weld of mechanically lined pipe.

 A.Q. Fu et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75 67

Fig. 6. Cracks detected by X-ray detectoscope near failed girth weld.

Table 1
Chemical analysis of failed mechanically lined pipe (wt.%).

Element C Si Mn P S Cr Mo Ni V Ti Cu

Weld joint 0.091 0.336 1.31 0.019 0.008 0.885 0.107 0.699 0.014 0.008 0.039
Base metal 0.069 0.273 0.53 0.009 0.005 0.025 0.006 0.009 0.001 0.015 0.010
GB9711-2011 requirements ≤0.24 ≤0.45 ≤1.4 ≤0.025 ≤0.015 ≤0.3 ≤0.15 ≤0.3 ≤0.1 ≤0.04 ≤0.5

2. Background of the failure

The failed mechanically lined pipe is composed of L415 carbon steel and 316L stainless steel, the outer diameter is 508 mm,
the wall thickness of outer carbon steel and stainless steel liner is 14.2 and 2.5 mm, respectively. The welding methods are Gas
Tungsten Arc Weld (GTAW) and Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW), and the X-ray inspection of weld joint was judged as
Class-I without defect. Prior to operation, the pipeline was conducted strength pressure test and sealing pressure test at
22 MPa and 16 MPa, respectively. The fluid flowing in pipeline is natural gas, the designed pressure is 16 MPa, and the operation
pressure is between 10.5 and 12.5 MPa, as shown in Fig. 3. The mechanically lined pipe failure occurred after 75 days operation
with operating parameters shown in Fig. 3.

3. Failure description and characterization

3.1. Generals of failed girth weld

Girth weld cracking was observed between straight pipe section and bend pipe section, as shown in Fig. 4, the crack propa-
gates along the weld-fusion line, as shown in Fig. 5(a,b). The crack length is 660 mm, and the maximum width is 30 mm. The
fracture surface of outer carbon steel is different from 316L liner, as shown in Fig. 5(a), crack initiated from outer carbon steel.
Crack source zone and propagation zone can be seen in the outer carbon steel layer, moreover, several pits, as shown in Fig.
5(b), were observed on fracture surface, the maximum diameter is up to 3 mm. No plastic deformation was observed near the

Fig. 7. Specimens for tensile strength (a) and Charpy energy (b) test.
68 A.Q. Fu et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75

Table 2
Mechanical properties and impact energy of failed mechanically lined pipe.

Mechanical properties Impact energy

Yield strength (MPa) Tensile strength (MPa) Fracture area −20 °C (J)

1 415 519 Base metal 46

2 424 530 Base metal 25
3 414 519 Base metal 44
Average value 418 523 / 38
Tarim Oilfield Technical Requirement ≥413 ≥520 / ≥30

crack source zone at outer carbon steel, while obvious plastic deformation was found at 316L liner, the liner is characterized by
tearing morphology due to external tensile stress, as shown in Fig. 5(c).

3.2. Inspection and testing of failed girth weld

3.2.1. X-ray inspection

The failed girth weld was inspected by XXH2505 X-ray detectoscope according to JB/T 4730.2-2005 II [10]. Five cracks were
detected around the girth weld, crack length is about 20 mm, while the depth is unknown based on X-ray inspection. One
crack is connected to the main crack, and others are around the main crack, one detected crack is shown in Fig. 6.

3.2.2. Chemical element analysis

Chemical element of outer carbon steel pipe and weld joint were analyzed by spectrometer, the results are giving in Table 1, it
is seen that all the elements contained in base metal of the outer carbon steel is in accordance with the requirement of GB 9711-
2011 [11], while there is no specific requirement for the weld joint.

3.2.3. Mechanical properties

Due to the mechanical strength of the mechanically lined pipe is mainly provided by outer carbon steel pipe, so mechanical
properties of the outer carbon steel pipe including ultimate tensile strength, hardness, and impact energy were tested. All the
specimens for mechanical tests include the weld joint in the middle, the sample for mechanical property test is shown in Fig.
7(a), the sample for Charpy test is shown in Fig. 7(b), and the results are given in Table 2.
The sample for the hardness test is trapezoid-like, as shown in Fig. 8, in which Line AB and Line GH with 50 points (interval =
0.6 mm) are for hardness test of base metal (outer carbon steel pipe), Line CD with 9 points (interval = 2.0 mm) and Line EF with
25 points (interval = 0.6 mm) are for hardness test of weld joint including sealing pass zone, root pass zone, filling pass zone and
cover pass zone, the results are shown in Fig. 9.

3.2.4. Metallurgical properties

Three areas were selected to take weld joint samples for metallurgical structure analysis, three areas are located in main crack
(#1), crack detected by X-ray inspection (#2), and uncracked area (#3), as illustrated in Fig. 10. With regard to three weld joint

Fig. 8. Weld joint specimen for hardness test.

 A.Q. Fu et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75 69

Fig. 9. Weld joint hardness of failed mechanically lined pipe (The interval between two points for Lines AB/EF/GH is 0.6 mm, and for Line CD is 2.0 mm).

samples, the metallurgical structure of root pass zone, sealing pass zone, filling pass zone and cover pass zone are characterized by
austenite, martensite, martensite and few bainite, bainite and few ferrite, as given in Table 3 and Fig. 11.

3.2.5. Cracking behavior characterization

3.2.5.1. Micro-morphology of the main crack. The main crack, as illustrated in Fig. 10(a), was analyzed by scanning electron micro-
scope. The crack source zone (the area close to 316L liner) is characterized by quasi-cleavage fracture, as shown in Fig. 12(a),
70 A.Q. Fu et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75

Fig. 10. Weld joint samples for metallurgical structure analysis.

incomplete fusion was found in the crack source zone, as shown in Fig. 12(b). The crack propagated in intergranular mode, as
shown in Fig. 12(c), secondary cracks were observed in the crack propagation zone, moreover, small amount of corrosion product
was found in the crack propagation zone, which indicated that the intergranular mode is related to corrosion occurred at crack tip.

3.2.5.2. Cracking behavior of sealing pass zone. The weld joint sample was taken from crack detected by X-ray, as illustrated in Fig.
10(a), images of weld joint and sealing pass are given in Fig. 13. In order to obtain the microstructure of the sealing pass area,
the sample was analyzed by SEM in different magnifications, as shown in Fig. 14. The branched crack was observed and black
material filled in crack, it is found that the black material is corrosion product. The element of the cracking zone was analyzed,
it is seen that there was no element difference on left and right sides of the crack, as shown in Fig. 15.

4. Failure analysis

4.1. Material mechanical performance

The chemical composition (Table 1) of the base metal meets the GB 9711-2011 Requirements [11]. The average ultimate ten-
sile strength of failed mechanically lined pipe are 523 MPa, as given in Table 2, which meets the value of 520–760 MPa as re-
quired in “Mechanically Lined Pipe Material Performance Standard of KLS Gasfield Gathering Pipeline Project”. Moreover, the
average impact energy of failed mechanically lined pipe is 38 J at − 20 °C, which also meets the requirement of no b 30 J
(−20 °C) as mentioned in “Mechanically Lined Pipe Material Performance Standard of KLS Gasfield Gathering Pipeline Project”.

Table 3
Metallurgical structure of weld joint samples taking from four zones.

Sample no. Root pass zone Sealing pass zone Filling pass zone Cover pass zone

1 Austenite Martensite Martensite + bainite (few) Bainite + ferrite (few)

2 Austenite Martensite Martensite + bainite (few) Bainite + ferrite (few)
3 Austenite Martensite Martensite + bainite (few) Bainite + ferrite (few)
 A.Q. Fu et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75 71

Fig. 11. Metallurgical structure of weld joint (a. Root pass zone, b. sealing pass zone, c. filling pass zone, d. cover pass zone).

4.2. Welding process

“API SPEC 5LD-2009: Specification for CRA clad or lined steel pipe” specified that the maximum hardness of weld joint is HV
248 [4]. Fig. 9 shows that the hardness of sealing pass zone and filling pass zone is higher than HV 248, generally, the weld with
high hardness is very susceptible to crack initiation and with poor ability for crack arrest. The metallurgical structure given in Fig.
11 demonstrated that high hardness zone is martensite, which is a typical hard and brittle structure. Therefore, crack initiated

Fig. 12. Morphologies of main crack (a. Crack source zone, b. incomplete fusion in crack source zone, c. crack propagation zone, d. intergranular cracking in crack
propagation zone).
72 A.Q. Fu et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75

Fig. 13. Images of weld joint and sealing pass zone.

from the boundary between L415 base metal, 316L liner and sealing pass zone, as shown in Fig. 13, then the crack propagated
across filling pass zone and cover pass zone successively.
According to the “Mechanically Lined Pipe Welding Procedure Specification of KLS Gasfield Gathering Pipeline Project”, four
kinds of welding rod was used for welding of mechanically lined pipe, ATS-F309L (SS) was used for sealing pass, ATS-F316L
(SS) was used for root pass, ATS-309MoL (SS) was used for filling pass, and CHE507 (CS) was used for cover pass, the detail in-
formation of the welding rod is given in Table 4. It is generally acknowledged that carbon steel or low alloy steel welding rod is
not allowed to use for welding on stainless steel layer, for the failed mechanically lined pipe, CHE507 welding rod was used for
welding on top of the filling pass layer (ATS-309MoL welding layer). This is equivalent to mix carbon steel and stainless steel to-
gether as result of forming a medium alloy steel weld joint, this medium alloy layer are highly inclined to form martensite struc-
ture during cooling process, this kind of metallurgical structure is the root cause of crack. It is suggested that two possible ways to
avoid the formation of martensite structure, first, a pure iron layer is introduced by building-up welding after filling weld of ATS-
309MoL; second, high Ni/Cr alloy welding material instead of carbon steel welding material is used for cover pass after filling
weld of ATS-309MoL. The Welding Institute (TWI) researchers [6] proposed a hybrid procedure, involving the deposition of a
CRA root/hot pass, followed by a high strength C\\Mn fill, moreover, it is pointed out that the conventional practice of use a
pure iron intermediate layer between the CRA and C\\Mn weld metal had poor welding characteristics and could be susceptible
to porosity and other defects.

4.3. Stress analysis

4.3.1. Operation stress analysis

Usually, it is necessary to consider the circumferential and axial stress for the line pipe during operation. As mentioned above,
the mechanical strength of the mechanically lined pipe is mainly provided by outer carbon steel pipe, the outer carbon steel pipe
was considered for stress analysis accordingly. The wall thickness (δ) is 14.2 mm, outer diameter (D) is 508 mm, and the testing
pressure (P) is 22 MPa. Due to the ratio of δ/D = 0.028 is b0.05, the axial stress (σa) and hoop stress (σh) can be expressed
as:

σ a ¼ PD=ð4δÞ ¼ 22 MPa  508=ð4  14:2Þ ¼ 196:76 MPa ð1Þ

σ h ¼ PD=ð2δÞ ¼ 22 MPa  508=ð2  14:2Þ ¼ 98:38 MPa ð2Þ

While the outer carbon steel pipe of the failed mechanically lined pipe grade is L415, the yield strength is ≥413 MPa, and ten-
sile strength is ≥520 MPa, moreover, the tensile strength of CHE507 welding rod is ≥490 MPa, all of them are much bigger than

Fig. 14. Cracking morphology of sealing pass zone.

 A.Q. Fu et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75
Fig. 15. Element analysis of sealing pass zone with small crack (b. Mo, c. Cr, d. Mg, e. Ni, f. Fe).

73
74 A.Q. Fu et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75

Table 4
Specification of the welding rod for mechanically lined pipe.

Type Grade Material Inspection standard Layer

Sealing pass ATS-F309L Stainless steel AWS A5.22-95 1

Root pass ATS-F309L Stainless steel AWS A5.9-06 1
Filling pass ATS-309MoL Stainless steel AWS A5.22-95 2
Cover pass CHE507 Carbon steel AWS A5.9-06 3–4
Shielding gas 99.99% Ar

axial stress and circumferential stress. Therefore, it is concluded that the strength of L415 carbon steel base metal and CHE507
weld joint are satisfied with the strength design requirement.

4.3.2. Environmental stress analysis

The field document shows that the failed pipe area had undergone the heavy rain for 2 days before the failure occurred, which
caused the ground settlement as result of part pipe section in strained condition. As schematically shown in Fig. 4(c), the straight
pipe section is fixed by the retaining wall, while the bend pipe section is pulled by soil movement, therefore, the stress concen-
tration occurred in weld joint due to pulling force and pipe self-weight, the top half weld joint is under the tensile stress condi-
tion, and the bottom half weld joint is under the compressed stress condition. The external stress would cause the relative motion
between outer L415 carbon steel and 316L liner, however, the outer carbon steel and liner was fixed by sealing weld, and the
relative motion is impeded by the sealing weld, consequently, the sealing pass zone, as the boundary of outer L415 carbon
steel and 316L liner, is a high shear stress concentration area. As mentioned above, the sealing pass zone is characterized by mar-
tensite structure with high hardness, which is a typical hard and brittle structure and very susceptible to cracking. T. Tkaczyk et al.
[5] also reported that the liner to clad transition region is the potential critical location for fracture failure during plastic straining,
in which the liner to clad transition region is equivalent to the sealing pass zone as shown in Fig. 8.

5. Conclusions and mitigation measures

5.1. Conclusions

(1) The metallurgical structure of root pass zone, sealing pass zone, filling pass zone and cover pass zone are characterized by
austenite, martensite, martensite and few bainite, bainite and few ferrite, respectively.
(2) The crack initiated from outer carbon steel, and propagated in intergranular mode along the weld-fusion line.
(3) The internal factor for the mechanically lined pipe cracking failure is martensite structure formed at sealing pass zone and
filling pass zone, which is a typical hard and brittle structure with hardness of HV 350–450.
(4) The external factor for the mechanically lined pipe cracking failure is external stress generated by soil movement, including
pulling stress, bending stress, and shear stress resulted in high stress concentration at girth weld.

5.2. Mitigation measures

(1) It is necessary to optimize the welding procedure, such as the weld joint structure design, welding rod material selection,
and heat treatment temperature control.
(2) It is compulsory to conduct corrosion-related welding procedure qualification, including corrosion resistance and stress cor-
rosion cracking sensitivity.
(3) It is an alternative option to improve the end manufacturing process of mechanically lined pipe, i.e., metallurgical bonding
or build-up welding are recommended to conduct at two ends.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Key Laboratory for Petroleum Tubular Engineering (2014D-5008-15), China National Petro-
leum Corporation.

References

[1] A. Shadravan, M. Amani, What every engineer or geoscientist should know about high pressure high temperature wells, SPE Kuwait International Petroleum Con-
ference and Exhibition, 2012, Kuwait City, Kuwait, 2012.
[2] M. Ueda, T. Omura, S. Nakamura, T. Abe, K. Nakamura, P.I. Nice, J.W. Martin, Development of 125 ksi grade HSLA steel OCTG for mildly sour environments, Cor-
rosion'2005, Paper No. 05089, NACE International, Houston, 2005.
[3] K.A. Macdonald, M. Cheaitani, Engineering critical assessment in the complex girth welds of clad and lines pipe materials, IPC2010-31627, Proceedings of the 8th
International Pipeline Conference, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 2010.
[4] API Specification 5LD: specification for CRA clad or lined steel pipe, 2015.
[5] T. Tkaczyk, A. Pépin, S. Denniel, Fatigue and fracture performance of reeled mechanically lined pipes, Proceedings of the Twenty-Second International Offshore
and Polar Engineering Conference, Rhodes, Greece, 2012.
 A.Q. Fu et al. / Engineering Failure Analysis 68 (2016) 64–75 75

[6] D. Howse, H. Pisarski, C. Nageswaran, M. Hoekstra, A. Bourgeon, P. Sinker, Improved Welding, Inspection and Integrity of Clad Pipeline Girth Welds, TWI Report
18807/13/11, 2011.
[7] D. Gentile, A. Carlucci, N. Bonora, G. Lannitti, Crack initiation and growth in bimetallic girth welds, Proceedings of the ASME 2014 33rd International Conference
on Ocean, Offshore and Arctic Engineering, San Francisco, California, 2014.
[8] A. Carlucci, N. Bonora, A. Ruggiero, G. Iannitti, G. Testa, Integrity assessment of clad pipe girth welds, ASME 2014 33rd International Conference on Ocean, Off-
shore and Arctic Engineering, San Francisco, California, 2014.
[9] S. Denniel, T. Tkaczyk, A. Pepin, Reeled mechanically lined pipe: cost efficient solution for static and dynamic applications in corrosive environment, Deep Off-
shore Technology Conference 2012, Perth, Australia, 2012.
[10] JB/T 4730.2-2005, Non-destructive testing of pressure equipment-Part 2: radiographic testing, 2005.
[11] GB 9711-2011, Petroleum and natural gas industries-steel pipe for pipeline transportation systems, 2011.