This document is downloaded from DR‑NTU (https://dr.ntu.edu.sg)Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.
Welding effect on tensile strength of grade S690Qsteel butt joint
Chen, Cheng; Chiew, Sing‑Ping; Zhao, Ming‑Shan; Lee, Chi‑King; Fung, Tat Ching
2018
Chen, C., Chiew, S.‑P., Zhao, M.‑S., Lee, C.‑K., & Fung, T. C. (2019). Welding effect on tensilestrength of grade S690Q steel butt joint. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 153,153‑168. doi:10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.10.009
https://hdl.handle.net/10356/142816
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2018.10.009
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. This paper was published in Journal ofConstructional Steel Research and is made available with permission of Elsevier Ltd.
Downloaded on 23 Aug 2021 10:37:09 SGT
1
Welding effect on tensile strength of grade S690Q steel butt joint
Cheng Chen a, Sing-Ping Chiew b, *, Ming-Shan Zhao b, Chi-King Lee c, Tat-Ching Fung a
a School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore
b Singapore Institute of Technology, Singapore
c School of Engineering and Information Technology, University of New South Wales Canberra,
Australia
ABSTRACT
In this study, welding effects on the tensile strength of high strength steel butt joints were
investigated experimentally and numerically. Two butt joints were fabricated by joining two 8
mm thick reheated, quenched and tempered S690Q high strength steel (HSS) plates together
using Shielded Metal Arc Welding with different welding heat inputs. In the experimental
study, post-welding microstructure and micro-hardness tests performed for the butt joints
confirmed the existence of a soft layer within the heat-affected zone. The size of this soft layer
increased when higher heat input was adopted. Subsequent coupon tensile tests showed that
the tensile strength of the butt joints deteriorated with the increase of the welding heat input.
In numerical study, a finite element (FE) simulation considering the non-uniform material
properties heat-affected zone was implemented to complement the experimental study.
Comparisons between experimental and numerical results were carried out for the temperature
history curves, failure modes and stress-strain curves for the coupons manufactured from the
butt joints. It was found that the proposed simulation method could reflect the influence of
welding process on the tensile strength of the S690Q HSS butt joints tested in this study.
Keywords: High strength steel, Butt joint, Tensile strength, Vickers hardness test,
Microstructure
1. INTRODUCTION
2
Structural steel has a pivotal position in civil engineering. It is widely employed in the
constructions of high-rise buildings, bridges, stadiums and offshore structures due to its high
strength-to-weight ratio, easy prefabrication properties and attractive appearance. Currently,
most of the existed steel structures are constructed by using normal strength steel with nominal
yield strength up to 460 MPa. However, with higher requirements in architectural and structural
design, normal strength steel is not always capable of delivering the most sustainable and
economic solution in many applications in which the self-weight of the structure is critical [1].
As a result, high strength steel (HSS) with yield stress higher than 460 MPa recently has
attracted much attention due to its remarkable strength to weight ratio and its high potential to
offer a lower combined material and fabrication costs due to the materials and weight reduction.
Owing to its good weldability, the reheated, quenched and tempered (RQT) low alloy steel is
one of the most favourable types of HSS and it has been used in many structural engineering
projects. Since it is easier to achieve uniform material properties during the manufacturing
process, RQT HSS is still mainly available in the plate form. As a result, HSS plates are often
welded to form built-up sections and welding is unavoidable in the fabrication of all HSS
sections in which severe temperature change is generated around the weld area. Towards this
end, as the RQT hardening process employed during the manufacturing of HSS makes it more
susceptible [2, 3] to high heat input than normal strength steel and its mechanical properties
are often adversely affected by welding [4, 5], there are concerns about the mechanical
performance of welded RQT HSS components.
Many experimental and numerical investigations showed that the welding thermal cycle often
changes the microstructure of RQT HSS. In particular, a fine grain heat affected zone (FGHAZ)
[6] will be created. This FGHAZ is often referred as a “soft layer” due to its inferior mechanical
properties compared with the base material. In addition, higher heat input is generally
accompanied by wider and worsen mechanical properties in the HAZ [7-11]. Meanwhile, it
was shown that the strength and size of the soft layer has influence on the strength of RQT HSS
joints [12]. By assuming a constant strength of the entire HAZ, numerical analysis predicted
that the tensile strength of HSS butt joints would decrease with the increase of the width of
HAZ. Hochhauser and Rauch [13] found that the width of soft layer ranged from 0.33 to 0.6
times of the specimen thickness, and the reduction of tensile strength of butt joint was 3 % to
8 % of its original strength. When conducting numerical simulation of the welding process,
one of the most complicated modelling parameters is the material property of the HAZ. In
general, due to the complex welding thermal cycles and non-uniform cooling rate, the material
properties within the HAZ are highly non-uniform. In many numerical investigations, the non-
3
uniform HAZ is simplified as a uniform area [14]. The size of the HAZ is estimated by using
hardness test, and simplified material properties would be then assigned [15,16] during
numerical modelling. The width of HAZ was increased in simulation when a higher welding
heat input was employed during the welding of the butt joints. Obviously, such simplified
simulation method cannot fully describe the material properties variation within the HAZ and
thus may not be able to fully reflect the influence of welding on mechanical behaviour of HSS
butt joint accurately.
The main objective of this paper is to investigate the influence of welding on the mechanical
performance of HSS butt joints experimentally and numerically. In the experimental study, two
joints were formed by 8 mm thick S690Q HSS plates by using Shielded Metal Arc Welding
(SMAW) with different welding heat inputs. After the joints were fabricated, coupons for direct
tensile test were carefully cut out from the welded joints. Microstructure and micro-hardness
tests were first employed to identify the extends and the mechanical properties of the soft layer.
Direct tensile tests of the coupons were then conducted to find out the impacts of welding on
the tensile behaviour of the butt joints. During the numerical analysis, a new simulation
procedure for joint strength prediction was proposed and its accuracy was validated by
comparing the modelling results with the tensile tests results. Furthermore, a preliminary
parametric study was conducted to investigate the impacts of different welding parameters on
the tensile strength of S690Q HSS butt joints with different plate thicknesses.
2. EXPERIMENTAL STUDY
2.1 Material and joint fabrication
The S690Q HSS employed in this study has a nominal yield strength of 690 MPa and a tensile
strength between 790 MPa and 930 MPa. These plates were manufactured by a refined
quenching and tempering technology for the formation of tempered martensite. In general, they
exhibit better homogeneity in through-thickness mechanical properties compared with
conventional quenched and tempered steel plates. The steel plates comply with EN 10025-6
grade S690Q specification [17] and is equivalent to the ASTM A514 steel [18].
The weld material LB-80L was used as filler for welding and it satisfies the AWS A5.5
E11018-G [19] filler metal specification. The mechanical properties of the S690Q HSS and
filler weld metal are listed in Table 1. The corresponding chemical composition and carbon
equivalent (CE) are listed in Table 2. It can be seen that the strength of weld metal matches
with that of S690Q HSS. Moreover, the HSS plates used have similar chemical composition
when compared with normal strength mild steel. Therefore, it has excellent weldability,
4
especially in the sense of reduced preheating requirements and reduced susceptibility to cold
cracking [20,21].
Table 1. Mechanical properties of S690 HSS and weld metal
Material Elastic modulus
(GPa)
Yield strength
(MPa)
Ultimate tensile strength
(MPa)
Elongation
(%)
S690Q HSS 209 745 838 14.5
LB-80L 210 767 848 22.0
Table 2. Chemical composition of S690 HSS and weld metal
Elements C Si Mn P S Ni Mo CE
S690Q HSS 0.14 0.40 1.35 0.012 0.003 0.01 0.12 0.40
LB-80L 0.05 0.56 1.37 0.009 0.005 2.77 0.76 0.33
In this study, two butt joints were fabricated using 8 mm thick S690Q HSS plates by SMAW.
Two different electrodes with diameter of 3.2 mm and 5.0 mm were utilized to achieve different
welding heat inputs. The two butt joint specimens were respectively named as BJ-3.2 and BJ-
5.0 for 3.2 mm and 5.0 mm electrodes welding. The temperature history near the weld was
recorded by two thermocouples. The plate configuration, thermocouple positions and a welded
joint are shown in Figure 1. The distance between the closest thermocouple and the top edge
of the weld is denoted as d=3 mm for joint BJ-3.2. During welding of BJ-3.2, the measured
peak temperature is 1139.4 ºC which is very close to the measurement limit (1200 ºC) of the
thermocouple used. As it is expected that during the welding of BJ-5.0 higher heat input will
be used, it was worried that the peak temperature at the same position may exceed 1200 ºC
which could damage the thermocouple. Hence, during the welding of BJ-5.0, d was increased
to 5 mm. Eventually, a peak temperature of 851.5 ºC was recorded at the thermocouple for joint
BJ-5.0 with d=5mm. The t8/5 cooling time (time for the joint to cool down from 800 ºC to 500
ºC) was 21.9 s and 37.4 s for joint BJ-3.2 and joint BJ-5.0, respectively. The welding was
carried out by an experienced qualified welder who was asked to keep the welding speed as
constant as possible. However, there were still some small differences in welding speed for
different welding passes. The start and finish time of each welding pass were recorded during
welding and the average welding speed was obtained by dividing the welding length by the
welding time. Subsequent tensile test results revealed that the mechanical behaviours of the
two specimens are almost the same. Hence, it can be deduced that similar welding heat input
and welding speed are achieved at the two positions.
It should be noted that while the welding speeds of the 3.2 mm and 5 mm electrode was similar,
the time of the peak temperature was more than 300 s in Figure 2a but less than 200 s in Figure
5
2b. It was because during the welding of BJ-3.2, one electrode was used up after the first
welding pass and it took time for the welder to install a new electrode before the second pass
was started. While for the welding of BJ-5.0, the second pass was started immediately after the
first pass was completed.
During welding, thermal deformation was limited by three clips, and two passes were used for
both joints. The corresponding welding parameters for each pass are listed in Table 3. Note
that the heat inputs listed in Table 3 are calculated according to EN 1011-1[22]. In addition,
the worker welded the joints by traditional welding method used for mild steel, and the welding
heat inputs were not controlled specially for S690Q HSS.
Table 3. Welding parameters of SMAW
Specimen
Electrode
diameter
(mm)
Voltage
(V)
Current
(A)
Welding
speed
pass 1
(mm/s)
Welding
speed
pass 2
(mm/s)
Heat input
pass 1
(kJ/mm)
Heat input
pass 2
(kJ/mm)
BJ-3.2 3.2 35.0 80 1.55 1.60 1.45 1.40
BJ-5.0 5.0 35.0 180 1.50 1.94 3.36 2.60
After the welding was completed, two coupons were cut out from each butt joint for direct
tensile test. Addition weldment covering on the joint welds was first removed to achieve a
uniform cross section of the coupons. In addition, as illustrated in Figure 3, a small block was
cut out from the welding zone for micro-hardness test and microstructure and scanning electron
microscope (SEM) observations. The small block was divided into two parts along the centre
line of the weld and then casted with epoxy into metallurgical specimens. Four metallugrical
specimens were prepared and polished. The surface is finally etched with 2 % nital solution in
order to observe the microstructure clearly.
2.2 Metallurgical investigation
2.2.1 Microstructure study
S690Q HSS mainly consists of martensite which is tempered after hardening treatment at
temperatures below the transformation point A1 (about 730 ºC for steel with carbon content of
0.15 %). The microstructure of S690Q HSS is shown in Figure 4. Theoretically, if martensite
is exposed to temperature between A1 and A3 and then cooled subsequently (similar to the
situation happens during welding), it would be transformed into ferrite and austenite and finally
decomposes into other microstructures with lower hardness such as ferrite, pearlite or cementite.
6
Metallurgical examinations were designed to expose such microstructural changes in the HAZ
of the butt joints by light optical microscopy and SEM.
Depending of microstructural appearance, the HAZ of the welded butt joints can be divided to
three sub-HAZs, namely the coarse-grain HAZ (CGHAZ), the fine-grain HAZ (FGHAZ) and
the tempering zone (Figure 5a) [23]. The CGHAZ is formed in the region where a temperature
ranging from A3 (about 830 ºC for steel with carbon content 0.15 %) up to the melting point
(about 1500 ºC) during welding. While, FGHAZ is generally formed at area where the
temperature is higher than the transformation temperature A1 but lower than the temperature
A3. The tempering zone is further away from the weld material, and there is nearly no phase
transformation that has taken place during welding in this area. Figure 5 shows the typical
microstructure distributions of the weld material (Figures 5b and 5c), the HAZ with both the
CGHAZ (Figures 5d and 5e) and the FGHAZ (Figure 5f and 5g). Figure 5d and 5e show that
the microstructure of the CGHAZ is granular bainite. While in the FGHAZ, the microstructure
changes from martensite to ferrite and cementite which has lower hardness compared with
martensite. The microstructure of tempering zone obtained by SEM test is shown in Figure 6,
and it can be seen that some martensite decomposes to ferrite.
2.2.2 Micro-hardness test
Vickers hardness measurement using 500 g force was carried out by using a micro-hardness
tester according to ISO 6507-1 [24]. As shown in Figure 7, three lines of indentations were
made at different thickness of the plate for the cut-out block. Note that the 4mm indentation
line is at the mid-thickness of the block. The interval between two successive indentations is
set as 0.5 mm. As the width of cut out block is 30 mm which is longer than the welding width,
the hardness tests were conducted on the weld material, the CGHAZ, the FGHAZ and the base
material successively.
Figure 8 shows the hardness distributions for joints BJ-3.2 and BJ-5.0. It can be seen that the
hardness results are highly symmetric about the weld centre line. For both joints, two soft layers
with lower hardness are located in the HAZs. In the FGHAZ, the minimum hardness value
(177 HV0.5) is 36.4 % lower than that of the base material, and the minimum hardness value
for both joints are similar. This suggested that the minimum hardness value is almost not
changed with the increase of the welding heat input.
Based on the hardness test, the estimated HAZ size of BJ-3.2 and BJ-5.0 were drawn according
to hardness test, as shown in Figure 9. The plate bevel of the butt joints is confidently
confirmed as one boundary between weld and HAZ, the boundary between HAZ and base
material was established by a three-point-curve. The three points are located in three
7
indentation layers separately and corresponding to a hardness value of 280 HV0.5. For joint
BJ-3.2, the average width of the HAZ is found to be 4.35 mm. When the welding heat input
was increased, the average width of HAZ in BJ-5.0 was increased to 7.75 mm.
2.3 Coupon tensile tests
The tensile behaviour of the S690Q HSS butt joints was investigated by direct tensile tests
using the 5900 series universal testing instruments (Figure 10) according to EN 10002-1 [25].
The gauge length of specimen is 50 mm, and the loading rate was set as 0.5mm/min until the
fracture has taken place. The extensometer was employed to capture the deformation of the
specimens. Total four specimens are manufactured by using the S690Q HSS welded butt joints
and were tested in tension.
Eventually, it was found that all the tested butt joints coupons fractured within the HAZ. The
stress-strain curves obtained are shown in Figure 11. The mechanical properties of the coupons
including elastic modulus, the yield strength (taken as the 0.2 % strain offset strengths), the
tensile strength and the fracture strain, are summarized in Table 4.
Table 4. Mechanical properties of butt joint coupons
Coupon Elastic modulus
(GPa)
Yield strength
(MPa)
Ultimate tensile strength
(MPa)
Elongation at
fracture (%)
S690Q HSS 209 745 838 14.5
BJ-3.2-1 206 672 809 6.2
BJ-3.2-2 209 667 802 6.6
BJ-5.0-1 207 569 750 6.5
BJ-5.0-2 203 562 745 6.5
From the coupon test results, it can be seen that both the yield strength and tensile strength of
the S690Q HSS butt joints tested in this study was decreased as the welding heat input
increased. Table 4 also indicates that the mean values and ranges of yield strength and ultimate
tensile strength for BJ-3.2 are 669 ± 3 MPa and 806 ± 4 MPa, respectively. For BJ-5.0, the
mean values and ranges of yield strength and ultimate tensile strength are 566 ± 4 MPa and
748 ± 3 MPa, respectively. The yield strength of BJ-3.2 decreased by 10.2 % when compared
with that of the base material, and the corresponding tensile strength decreased by 3.8 %. For
the joint BJ-5.0 in which higher heat input was used during the welding, the yield strength and
tensile strength was reduced by 24.1 % and 10.8 %, respectively. Furthermore, the elongation
of the butt joints was reduced by 55.5 % after welding for both joints BJ-3.2 and BJ-5.0. One
reason for the serious deterioration of elongation is the high concentration of the plastic strain
8
caused by high heat input and few passes adopted during the welding of the joint [11]. In
addition, due to the existence of the “soft layer”, the deformation of S690Q HSS butt joint was
localized within the HAZ instead of uniformly distributed over the whole gauge length. As a
result, while the strain within the HAZ of the HSS butt joint is larger than the strain within the
HAZ of the specimen with uniform material property, a smaller final deformation overall the
gauge length was recorded.
Based on the EN ISO 18265 [26] guideline for the conversion of hardness-to-tensile strength
value for quenching and tempering steels, a hardness of 280 HV0.5 is corresponding to a tensile
strength of 876 ± 36 MPa. This is within 4 % error when compared with the tensile strength
(838 MPa) obtained from the coupon test. This means that the hardness to strength conversion
value indicated by EN ISO 18265 is reasonable and reliable for S690Q HSS used in this study.
3. NUMERICAL STUDY
Finite element (FE) simulation has been frequently utilized for welding modelling and residual
stress study of welded joints [27-32] as it requires much less resource to conduct with compared
with experimental study. Many FE models used in previous studies, material properties of steel
were assumed to be deteriorated during the heating stage but then recover back to original
values after the welding parts are cooled down to room temperature. While such assumption is
applicable to the welding of normal strength steel joint, it is not applicable for the case of
S690Q HSS joint due to the existence of the soft zone in the HAZ. For those numerical models
in which the effect of soft HAZ is considered, the whole HAZ was often treated as a single
material with homogenous material properties [14]. While the width of HAZ was increased to
reflect the effects of higher welding heat input on the joints, such simplified simulation method
may not truly describe the shape and material properties of the HAZ, and therefore cannot fully
reflect the influence of welding on mechanical behaviour of HSS butt joint.
In view of the deficiencies of previous simulation approaches, in this study a new modelling
procedure is proposed. The new approach adopted the sequentially coupled thermal stress
analysis method in ABAQUS. This sequential coupled thermal stress analysis consists of
alternative rounds of thermal analysis and stress analysis. Thermal cycles of butt joints during
welding are determined by the thermal analysis model with the help of a user-defined
subroutine DFLUX where double-ellipsoid heat source is defined. The obtained temperature
history of butt joint is then imported into the stress analysis model where two other user-defined
subroutines UEXPAN and USDFLD [33] are employed to define the deteriorated material
9
properties within the HAZ based on the imported temperature history. The tensile behaviour of
S690Q HSS butt joints is then finally analysed after the joints cool down to room temperature.
3.1 The FE models used
In the numerical simulation, two 3D solid finite element models, namely the Num-BJ-3.2 and
the Num-BJ-5.0, were created according to the dimensions of the butt joints BJ-3.2 and BJ-5.0,
respectively. Noted that during the welding modelling, welding materials was added according
to the two passes employed in according to the actual welding details, as presented in Figure
12. In addition, the mesh for the coupon tensile test was embedded within the plate and welding
model to facilitate subsequent data transfer for the coupon tension test modelling.
In the thermal analysis model, double-ellipsoid heat source, described as in Equations (1) and
(2), is defined with the help of the user defined subroutine DFLUX [33].
For the front part of heat source
𝑞(𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧, 𝑡) =6√3𝑄𝑓1
𝑎𝑏𝑐1𝜋√𝜋e
−3x2
a2 −3y2
b2 −3z2
c12
(1)
For the rear part of heat source
𝑞(𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧, 𝑡) =6√3𝑄𝑓2
𝑎𝑏𝑐2𝜋√𝜋e
−3x2
a2 −3y2
b2 −3z2
c22
(2)
𝑄 = 𝜂𝑈𝐼 (3)
In Equations (1) and (2), f1 and f2 are fractions of deposited heat, and represent the heat
apportionments of heat flux in the front and rear quadrants, respectively. Since more energy is
applied in the front part of heat source, f1 and f2 are respectively defined as 1.33 and 0.67, so
that f1+f2=2. a is the width of semi-axes of heat source and is equal to 4.4 mm and 8.1 mm for
the first and second welding pass, respectively. b is the depth semi-axes of heat source and is
equal to 5.0 mm and 3.0 mm for the first and second welding pass, respectively. c1 and c2 are
the front and rear semi-axes of heat source, respectively. They are assumed to be the same for
the two welding passes and equal to 4.4 mm and 8.8 mm, respectively. The welding speed is
defined based on the measurement in tests. The welding heat input Q is determined by Equation
(3). The value of voltage U and current I are determined according to test values listed in Table
3. Thermal efficient factor 𝜂 is assigned with the value of 0.8 according to EN BS. 1011-1[22].
There are 23996 elements in thermal analysis model. The mesh for the welding materials and
its adjacent areas are refined to capture the steep temperature gradient during welding, and
transition elements are employed to link the coarse and fine mesh zones. The eight-node linear
heat transfer brick (DC3D8) is employed as the FE type for modelling. Regarding thermal
10
boundary conditions, convection and radiation surfaces were assigned to model with film
coefficient of 100 W/(m2˚C) and an emissivity coefficient 0.8 was adopted. The birth and death
element approach [31, 32] was used to simulate the generation of welds, and the time
interruption between two welding passes were also considered and based on the recorded
temperature history in actual welding (Figure 2). The temperature history of thermal analysis
model was then imported into stress analysis as a predefined field.
For the direct tensile test stress analysis model, as the FE mesh for the coupon was embedded
within the mesh employed for welding simulation, the nodal temperature history obtained
during thermal analysis model can be directly assigned to the nodes of the coupon mesh. After
the temperature history data was imported, the tensile test process was simulated as standard
non-linear material and large deformation quasi-static analysis to predict the mechanical
performance of butt joint coupon. The C3D8 element which is an 8-node linear brick was
employed for coupon test modelling, and the physical boundary conditions of numerical
models are determined according to the experiment set up, as shown in Figure 13.
3.2 Material properties
During the sequential coupled thermal stress analysis of the welding process, both the thermal
properties and mechanical properties for the S690Q HSS were defined as functions of the
temperature. The thermal properties of S690Q HSS consist of density, thermal conductivity,
specific heat and latent heat. The density is assumed to be 7850 kg/m3. The latent heat of HSS
is defined as 300 kJ/kg with liquidus temperature 1480 ˚C and solidus temperature 1430 ˚C.
The specific heat ca and conductivity a are determined according to the equations given in
EC3: part 1-2 [34].
The specific heat of steel ca (J/(kg˚C)) is determined by the following equations from EC3 [34]:
For 20 ℃ ≤ 𝑇 < 600 ℃;
𝑐𝑎 = 425 + 7.73 × 10−1𝑇 − 1.69 × 10−3𝑇2 + 2.22 × 10−6𝑇3 (4)
For 600 ℃ ≤ 𝑇 < 735 ℃;
𝑐𝑎 = 666 +13002
738−𝑇 (5)
For 735 ℃ ≤ 𝑇 < 900 ℃;
𝑐𝑎 = 545 +17820
𝑇−731 (6)
For 900 ℃ ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 1200 ℃;
𝑐𝑎 = 650 (7)
The thermal conductivity of steel a (W/(m˚C)) is defined from the following equations [34]:
11
For 20 ℃ ≤ 𝑇 < 800 ℃;
𝜆𝑎 = 54 − 3.3310−2𝑇 (8)
For 800 ℃ ≤ 𝑇 ≤ 1200 ℃;
𝜆𝑎 = 27.3 (9)
As one of the mechanical properties, the expansion coefficient T (mechanical property) is also
derived from EC3: part 1-2 [34] and defined by the user-defined subroutine UEXPAN during
stress analysis as follows:
For 20°C ≤ T < 750°C;
𝜀T = 1.2 × 10−5T + 0.4 × 10−8T2 − 2.416 × 10−4 (10)
For 750°C ≤ T ≤ 860°C;
𝜀T = 1.2 × 10−2 (11)
For 750°C < T ≤ 1200°C;
𝜀T = 2 × 10−5T − 6.2 × 10−3 (12)
For the most important mechanical property, the stress-strain curves at elevated temperatures
and after cooling down from different elevated temperatures are defined based on experimental
results [3], as shown in Figure 14a. During the heating stage of welding, the stress-strain
curves at elevated temperatures are determined for every node depending on its temperature.
After the welding is completed and butt joint is cooled down, the nodal material properties are
adjusted by another user-defined subroutine USDFLD. The nodal material properties are
determined by referring to the post heating stress-strain curves (Figure 14b) obtained from
Zhao et al. [4] for different peak temperature attained during welding.
It should be noted that in the FE model for the direct tensile test analysis, the post-heating
stress-strain curves shown in Figure 14b, cannot be directly used to retrieve material properties
of the HAZ and further interpolations are still necessary. The reason is that as additional
weldment material is added during the welding and these addition materials will eventually
achieve an ultimate tensile strength and hardness compatible with the S690Q HSS.
From Figure 8, the minimum hardness in the HAZ is 177 HV0.5 and it is corresponding a
tensile strength of 566 MPa [26]. As the tensile strength of S690Q HSS is 552 MPa after
exposure to 800 °C (Figure 14b), this implies that the minimum hardness location will
experienced a peak temperature of approximately equal to (but slightly higher than) 800 °C
Hence, it is defined in the subroutine USDFLD that the material properties of S690Q HSS at
12
the minimum hardness location will follow the post-heating stress-strain curves corresponding
to the 800 °C curve shown in Figure 14b.
For the region between the minimum hardness location and the outer boundary of the HAZ
where the maximum temperature reached during welding is only 400 °C and the hardness of
the HSS (280 HV0.5) is not affected by the heat input during welding, the material properties
of the S690Q HSS will be calculated by linearly interpolating the post-heating stress-strain
curves between 400 °C and 800 °C based on the hardness value of the materials obtained from
the hardness test.
For the region between the minimum hardness location and the inner boundary of the HAZ, it
is assumed that 1350 °C is the maximum temperature reached for the CGHAZ [10-11]. As the
maximum temperature reached in this region should be between 800 °C and 1350 °C and an
increase in material hardness is observed from the hardness test (Figure 8), this indicated that
the mechanical properties of materials in this region must be improved from the minimum
hardness location the inner boundary of HAZ. As a result, in order to reflect such an
improvement mechanical property in this region, the material property was assumed to increase
linearly with the increase of hardness so that at the 1350 °C location, the mechanical properties
of the materials are the same as the base metal HSS materials properties.
Finally, for the region between the weld centre and the CGHAZ where the weldment material
(LB-80L) is deposited during welding, since the material properties of the weldment after
cooling are similar to the HSS (they have very similar hardness value), the base metal HSS
materials properties are assigned to materials in this region. The mechanical properties of HAZ
are indicated in term of hardness as shown in Figure 15.
3.3 Verification of numerical model
The proposed simulation method is verified by comparing the model predictions with the
experimental results in terms of the temperature history records, the failure mode of the coupon
tension test and the stress-strain curves of butt joints during direct tensile test. Figure 16 shows
the typical temperature distribution of the butt joint during welding, and the temperature history
is extracted and compared with the test data in Figure 17. The numerical results are generally
in good agreement with the experimental data especially in the peak temperature and cooling
rate. However, it should be noted that the difference between measured and simulated
temperature increase slighting with the distance from the welding. The reason is that the
thermal material properties and thermal boundary conditions used in the modelling were based
on the suggestions by EC3. While such suggestions are reasonable and realistic, there are
13
inevitability some differences between them and the actual conditions and values of the HSS
used. Therefore, it is inevitable that the temperature field predicted by the model is not exactly
the same as the actual measurement. Obviously, such modelling error will accumulate and
increase as the distance from the welding position (i.e. heat source) or welding time increase
and results in high errors as shown in Fig. 18.
The failure models of S690Q HSS butt joints were also obtained by FE analysis and are shown
in Figure 18. Same as test results, the FE model predicted that the coupon was failed by
necking and fracture at one of the HAZ. Besides the failure mode, the stress-strain curves
obtained from FE modelling shown reasonably good consistency with the corresponding test
results, as shown in Figure 19. The yield stress fy and ultimate tensile strength fu of tested
coupons and numerical models are compared and listed in Table 5. It is found that the proposed
simulation method can predict the tensile strength of S690Q HSS butt joint precisely. The
errors for the ultimate tensile strength are only 3.94 % and 2.50 % for BJ-3.2 and BJ-5.0,
respectively. Regarding the yield strength, the difference between finite element model and test
results is slight greater. The error of yield strength are 5.04 % and 16.5 % for joint BJ-3.2 and
joint BJ-5.0, respectively. Hence, it can be concluded that the proposed simulation method can
be predict the influence of welding on the tensile performance of S690 HSS butt joint
reasonably well.
Table 5. Comparison of mechanical properties for butt joints BJ-3.2 Num-BJ-3.2 Error (%) BJ-5.0 Num-BJ-5.0 Error (%)
fy (MPa) 669 703 5 565 660 16
fu (MPa) 806 774 4 745 726 3
3.4 Parametric study
Based on the validated simulation model, a small scale parametric study is carried out to
investigate the effect of welding on butt joints with different plate thickness. FE models for
four additional butt joints with 12 mm and 16 mm plate thickness are built. For each model,
two different weld heat inputs of 1.425 kJ/mm and 2.98 kJ/mm per welding pass are employed.
Note that 1.425 kJ/mm is the average heat input recorded of joint BJ-3.2. 2.98 kJ/mm is the
average heat input of joint BJ-5.0 with the average heat input defined as
𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠 1+ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑢𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑎𝑠𝑠 2
2. The welding pass configurations for 12 mm and 16 mm
butt joints are presented in Figure 20. There are four welding passes for 12 mm joints, and
14
seven passes for 16 mm joints. The material property definition is the same as the validated
model.
For all the four numerical models created, it is found that the failure mode is the same as the 8
mm butt joints tested. That is, the failure positions are all located at the soft HAZ layer. The
characteristic strength of modelled butt joints, including yield strength and tensile strength, are
summarized in Table 6. In addition, for each model, the yield strength reduction factor
Ry(𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑢𝑡𝑡 𝑗𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡
𝑌𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑆690𝑄 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒 𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑎𝑙) and the tensile strength reduction factor
Ru(𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑏𝑢𝑡𝑡 𝑗𝑜𝑖𝑛𝑡
𝑇𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑅𝑄𝑇 𝑆690) are calculated and their values are summarized in Figure 21.
Table 6. Characteristic strength of butt joints predicted by numerical model
Thickness
(mm) 8 12 16
Heat input
(kJ/mm) 1.425 2.98 1.425 2.98 1.425 2.98
fy (MPa) 703 660 721 692 723 704
fu (MPa) 774 726 800 772 804 779
Note: For the base metal S690Q HSS fy=745 MPa and fu=838 MPa
From the reduction factor curves shown in Figure 21, the modelling results suggested that for
a given welding heat input, the influence of welding on the strength of butt joint will be reduced
with the increase of butt joint thickness. When the plate thickness was increased from 8 mm to
16 mm, the Ry and Ru were respectively increased from 0.914 to 0.940 and from 0.910 to 0.946
for a heat input of 1.425 kJ/mm. For the heat input of 2.98 kJ/mm, the Ry and Ru were increased
from 0.858 to 0.916 and from 0.855 to 0.917, respectively. These results could be caused by
the higher heat conduction effect for a thicker plate. For a given welding heat input per pass,
when the plate thickness is increased, as the weld pass size relative to the plate thickness is
reduced, a higher portion of heat lost will be contributed by conduction. As a result, the cooling
rate near the HAZ is also increased and the area affected by high temperature is smaller
compared with a thinner plate. Eventually, the size of the soft FGHAZ becomes smaller and
results in better performance.
4. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents a study on the influence of welding on mechanical performance of HSS
butt joints by experimental test and numerically analysis. In the experimental study, two joints
are fabricated by welding together two 8 mm thick reheated, quenched and tempered S690Q
high strength steel (HSS) plate by shielded metal arc welding (SMAW) with different welding
heat inputs per welding pass. Microstructure and micro-hardness tests for butt joints confirmed
15
that the welding heat input generated a weaker and soft layer of fine grain heat affected zone
(FGHAZ) due to microstructure changing from tempered martensite to ferrite and cementite.
The existence of the soft layer directly impairs tensile strength of the butt joints, and the
deterioration becomes more serious with increase of welding heat input as it will increase the
size of the FGHAZ. Subsequent tensile test of the coupon showed that this weaker HAZ as the
failure location of the joint under tension. However, the exact fracture location within the HAZ
was not precisely determined in this study and therefore a more detailed examination of the
exact facture location within the HAZ could be a good topic for future research. For the 8 mm
S690Q HSS butt joints tested, it is found the lowest hardness of soft layer FGHAZ was not
sensitive to the increase of welding heat input per pass. In the numerical analysis part, a new
simulation is proposed to predict the direct tensile strength of the welding coupon obtained
from the experimental study. The accuracy of the proposed model is then validated by
comparing with the test results. Furthermore, by using the validated model, a small scale
parametric study is conducted to investigate the effect of welding on the tensile strength of
S690Q HSS butt joints with different plate thickness. The parametric study eventually showed
that if the heat input per pass is kept constant, the joint strength reduction in direct tensile test
is reduced as the butt joint thickness is increased.
16
REFERENCES
[1] Chiew, S. P., Lee, C. K., Zhao, M. S., Jin, Y. F., Cai, Y. Q. and Chen, C., Intensification of low
density development – Functional Bridging Building, Keynote lecture, Proceeding of the 12th
International Conference on Steel, Space and Composite Structures, 28-30 May 2014, Prague,
Czech Republic
[2] Chen J, Young B, Uy B. Behavior of high strength structural steel at elevated temperatures[J].
Journal of structural engineering, 2006, 132(12): 1948-1954.
[3] Qiang X, Bijlaard F, Kolstein H. Dependence of mechanical properties of high strength steel S690
on elevated temperatures. Construction and Building Materials, 2012, 30: 73-79.
[4] Chiew S P, Zhao M S, Lee C K. Mechanical properties of heat-treated high strength steel under
fire/post-fire conditions. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2014, 98: 12-19.
[5] Qiang X, Bijlaard F S K, Kolstein H. Post-fire mechanical properties of high strength structural
steels S460 and S690. Engineering Structures, 2012, 35: 1-10.
[6] Wojnowski D, Oh Y. K, Indacochea J. E. Metallurgical assessment of the softened HAZ region
during multipass welding. Journal of manufacturing science and engineering, 2000, 122(2): 310-
315.
[7] Loureiro A. J. R. Effect of heat input on plastic deformation of undermatched welds. Journal of
materials processing technology, 2002, 128(1): 240-249.
[8] Shi Y, Han Z. Effect of weld thermal cycle on microstructure and fracture toughness of simulated
heat-affected zone for a 800MPa grade high strength low alloy steel. Journal of materials
processing technology, 2008, 207(1): 30-39.
[9] Kapustka N, Conrardy C, Babu S, et al. Effect of GMAW process and material conditions on DP
780 and TRIP 780 welds. WELDING JOURNAL-NEW YORK-, 2008, 87(6): 135.
[10] Akselsen O. M, Rorvik G, Onsoien M. I, et al. Assessment and predictions of HAZ tensile
properties of high-strength steels. Welding Journal, 1989, 68(9): 356.
[11] Pirinen M, Martikainen Y, Layus P D, et al. Effect of heat input on the mechanical properties of
welded joints in high-strength steels. Welding International, 2016, 30(2): 129-132.
[12] Rodrigues D M, Menezes L F, Loureiro A, et al. Numerical study of the plastic behaviour in tension
of welds in high strength steels. International Journal of Plasticity, 2004, 20(1): 1-18.
[13] Hochhauser D. I. F, Rauch M. R. Influence of the soft zone on the strength of welded modern
HSLA steels. Welding in the World, 2012, 56(5-6): 77-85.
[14] Zhao M S, Lee C K, Fung T C, et al. Impact of welding on the strength of high performance steel
T-stub joints. Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2017, 131: 110-121.
[15] Khurshid M, Barsoum Z, Barsoum I. Load Carrying Capacities of Butt Welded Joints in High
Strength Steels. Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, 2015, 137(4): 041003.
[16] Mochizuki M, Shintomi T, Hashimoto Y, et al. Analytical study on deformation and strength in
HAZ-softened welded joints of fine-grained steels. Welding in the World, 2004, 48(9-10): 2-12.
[17] BSI. Hot rolled products of structural steels: part 6 technical delivery conditions for flat products
of high yield strength structural steels in the quenched and tempered condition, BS EN 10025-6.
British Standards Institution, London; 2004.
[18] ASTM. Standard specification for high-yield-strength, quenched and tempered alloy steel plate,
suitable for welding. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, United States; 2009.
[19] AWS D1.1. Structural Welding Code-Steel. American National Standards Institute, Miami, 2008.
[20] Klein M, Spindler H, Luger A, et al. Thermomechanically Hot Rolled High and Ultra High
Strength Steel Grades–Processing, Properties and Application. 2005, 500: 543-550.
[21] De Meester B. The weldability of modern structural TMCP steels. ISIJ international, 1997, 37(6):
537-551.
[22] BSI. EN BS. 1011-1: Welding. Recommendations for welding of metallic materials. General
guidance for arc welding, 2009.
17
[23] Boumerzoug Z, Derfouf C, Baudin T. Effect of welding on microstructure and mechanical
properties of an industrial low carbon steel. Engineering, 2010, 2(07): 502-506.
[24] ISO. BSI, 6507-1: Metallic Materials-Vickers Hardness Test- Part 1: Test Method, British
Standards Institution, London, 2005
[25] BSI, BS EN 10002-1: tensile testing of metallic materials: part1 method of test at ambient
temperature, ed. London: British Standards Institution, 2001.
[26] BS EN ISO 18265: Metallic materials. Conversion of hardness values, International Organization
for Standardization, Geneva, 2003.
[27] Brickstad B, Josefson B. L. A parametric study of residual stresses in multi-pass butt-welded
stainless steel pipes. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 1998, 75(1): 11-25.
[28] Deng D, Murakawa H. Numerical simulation of temperature field and residual stress in multi-pass
welds in stainless steel pipe and comparison with experimental measurements. Computational
materials science, 2006, 37(3): 269-277.
[29] Deng D, Murakawa H. Numerical simulation of temperature field and residual stress in multi-pass
welds in stainless steel pipe and comparison with experimental measurements. Computational
materials science, 2006, 37(3): 269-277.
[30] Jiang J., Chiew S. P., Lee C. K., Tiong P.L.Y. A numerical study on residual stress of high strength
steel box column, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2017, 128: 440-450.
[31] Lee C. K., Chiew S. P., Jiang, J. Residual stress of high strength steel box T-joints, Part II:
Numerical study, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, 2014, 98: 73-87.
[32] Lee C. K., Chiew S. P., Jiang, J. Residual stress study of welded high strength steel thin-walled
plate-to-plate joints, Part 2: Numerical Modeling, Thin-Walled Structures, 2012, 59: 120-131
[33] ABAQUS. ABAQUS user subroutines reference manual 6.10, 2010.
[34] Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures: part 1-2. General rules-structural fire design, BS EN 1993-
1-2. London: British Standard Institution; 2005.
18
Figure 1. Plate configuration and thermocouple positions
(a) Temperature history of BJ-3.2
(b) Temperature history of BJ-5.0
Figure 2. Temperature history of butt joints during welding
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Tem
per
ature
(°C
)
Time (s)
Position 1
Position 2
0
200
400
600
800
1000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Tem
per
ature
(°C
)
Time (s)
Position 1Position 2
19
Figure 3 Dimension of coupons and cut out block for hardness, micro-hardness and tensile tests
30
20
20
20
20
91
29
11
0
20
20
20
20
11
0
61.1 8.9 60 8.9 61.1
200
R12.5
R12.5
R12.5
R12
.5
12
.5 ±
0.2
60.061.1 61.1
200.0
8
20
.0
R12.5 R
12.5
8.98.9
8.9 61.18.961.1
8
200.0
3 28.528.5
60°
Unit: mm
20
(a) light optical microscopy image
(b) SEM image
Figure 4. Microstructure of S690Q HSS
21
22
(a) light optical microscopy image of HAZ
(b) light optical microscopy image of weld material
23
(c) SEM image of weld material
(d) light optical microscopy image of CGHAZ
24
(e) SEM image of CGHAZ
(f) light optical microscopy image of FGHAZ
25
(g) SEM image of FGHAZ
Figure 5. Microstructures of weld material, CGHAZ and FGHAZ
Figure 6. SEM image showing the microstructure of tempering zone
26
Figure 7. Indentation points distribution
(a) hardness variation along 1 mm indentation line for BJ-3.2
(b) hardness variation along 4 mm indentation line for BJ-3.2
150
180
210
240
270
300
330
360
-15 -12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15
Hard
nes
s (H
V0
.5)
Distance (mm)
BJ-3.2-1mm
WeldHAZ HAZBase material Base material
150
180
210
240
270
300
330
360
-15 -12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15
Ha
rdn
ess
(HV
0.5
)
Distance (mm)
BJ-3.2-4mmWeldHAZ HAZBase material Base material
27
(c) Hardness variation along 7 mm indentation line for BJ-3.2
(d) Hardness variation along 1 mm indentation line for BJ-5.0
150
180
210
240
270
300
330
360
-15 -12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15
Ha
rdn
ess
(HV
0.5
)
Distance (mm)
BJ-3.2-7mmWeldHAZ HAZBase material Base material
150
180
210
240
270
300
330
360
-15 -12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15
Hard
nes
s (H
V0.5
)
Distance (mm)
BJ-5.0-1mmWeldHAZ HAZ
Base
material
Base
material
28
(e) Hardness variation along 4 mm indentation line for BJ-5.0
(f) Hardness variation along 7 mm indentation line for BJ-5.0
Figure 8. Measured hardness values of two butt joints
150
180
210
240
270
300
330
360
-15 -12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15
Ha
rdn
ess
(HV
0.5
)
Distance (mm)
BJ-5.0-4mmWeldHAZ HAZ
Base
material
Base
material
150
180
210
240
270
300
330
360
-15 -12 -9 -6 -3 0 3 6 9 12 15
Hard
nes
s (H
V0.5
)
Distance (mm)
BJ-5.0-7mmWeldHAZ HAZ
Base
material
Base
material
3 5.6
3.1
5.6
12.23.1
HAZ WM BM
12.26.2 6.2
39.3 9.3
BJ-3.2 BJ-5.0
8 8
Unit:mm
29
Figure 9. HAZ boundaries for Specimens BJ-3.2 and BJ-5.0
Figure 10. The 5900 series universal testing instruments
Figure 11. Stress-strain curves of butt joint coupons
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Str
ess
(MP
a)
Strain (%)
BJ-3.2-1
BJ-3.2-2
BJ-5.0-1
BJ-5.0-2
S690Q HSS
30
Figure 12. Numerical model of S690Q HSS butt joint
31
Figure 13. 3D finite element model for coupon stress analysis model
32
(a) Stress-strain curves of RQT S690 HSS at elevated temperatures
(b) Post-heating stress-strain curves of S690Q HSS after cooling down from different elevated
temperatures
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
s (
MP
a)
(%)
25°C
100°C
200°C
300°C
400°C
450°C
500°C
600°C
700°C
800°C
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24 27 30
s(M
Pa)
(%)
25°C 400°C
600°C 800°C
900°C 1000°C
33
Figure. 14. Stress-stain curves defined in stress analysis model
Figure 15. Hardness diagram of numerical model
Figure 16. Temperature distribution of Num-BJ-3.2
34
(a) Comparison of temperature history for BJ-3.2 for thermocouple located at 3mm and 8mm from the
welding
(b) Comparison of temperature history for BJ-5.0 for thermocouple located at 5mm and 10mm from
the welding
Figure 17. Comparison of temperature history
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Tem
per
atu
re (
°C)
Time (s)
BJ-3.2-3mm
BJ-3.2-8mm
Num-BJ-3.2-3mm
Num-BJ-3.2-8mm
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Tem
per
ature
(°C
)
Time (s)
BJ-5.0-5mm
BJ-5.0-10mm
Num-BJ-5.0-5mm
Num-BJ-5.0-10mm
35
(a) Failure mode of BJ-3.2
(b) Failure mode of BJ-5.0
Figure 18. Comparison of failure mode
36
(a) Comparison of stress-strain curves for BJ-3.2
(b) Comparison of stress-strain curves for BJ-5.0
Figure 19. Comparison of stress-strain curves
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Str
ess
(MP
a)
Strain (%)
BJ-3.2-1
BJ-3.2-2
Num-BJ-3.2
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Str
ess
(MP
a)
Strain (%)
BJ-5.0-1
BJ-5.0-2
Num-BJ-5.0
37
(a) Welding passes for 12mm butt joints
(b) Welding passes for 16mm butt joints
Figure 20. Welding pass configuration for 12mm and 16mm butt joints
38
(a) Welding heat input 1.425kJ/mm
(b) Welding heat input 2.98kJ/mm
Figure 21. Reduction factor of yield strength and ultimate strength
0.9
0.92
0.94
0.96
0.98
1
6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Red
uct
ion
fac
tor
Thickness (mm)
Ry
Ru
0.8
0.84
0.88
0.92
0.96
1
6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Red
uct
ion f
acto
r
Thickness (mm)
Ry
Ru