Page 1 of 9

RESIDUAL STRESS DETERMINATION OF DUPLEX STAINLESS STEEL WELDS AND THEIR SUSCEPTIBILITY TO INTERGRANULAR CORROSION B. Gideon – ARV Offshore, Bangkok, Thailand L. Ward – RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia D. G. Carr –Australian Nuclear Science and Technology

Organization (ANSTO), Australia

ABSTRACT

The focus of this paper is to provide an overview of the various tests performed to systematically study the stress / strain levels within the various regions / phases of the Duplex Stainless Steel (DSS) welds and any correlation with susceptibility to IGC. Stress / strain levels were determined by means of Neutron Diffraction techniques. Magnetic Force Microscopy (MFM) and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) were used to determine the size, shape and distribution of the austenite and ferrite within the various regions . Test methods used to assess the susceptibility to IGC, were ASTM A262 and a modified Double Loop Electrochemical Potentiokinetic Reactivation (DL-EPR) test. From the neutron diffraction results obtained a clear variation of stress/strain was evident between the austenite and ferrite in the base material, HAZ and weld. The MFM results of the weld metal shows the formation of both a finer and coarse structure within the weld metal, which is dependent on the level of undercooling. The DL-ERP test results revealed that the fill area for all 4 test conditions and the base material had the highest values for Ir/Ia and Qr/Qa. EDS was used for qualitative elemental analysis to determine which elements were present and their relative abundance.

KEYWORDS Duplex Stainless Steel, Intergranular Corrosion, Double Loop Electrochemical Potentiokinetic Reactivation, Magnetic Force Microscopy, Neutron Diffraction

INTRODUCTION

A major problem with the welding of Duplex Stainless Steel (DSS) is maintaining a ferrite–austenite ratio close to 50:50. Rapid cooling effects associated with weld thermal cycles, often results in ferrite contents in the weld metal in excess of 50% resulting in the loss of strength and increased susceptibility to IGC. Further, the weld structure and the austenite / ferrite phase ratio are largely influenced by weld heat inputs and the cooling rates. A careful balance of heat input and cooling rates has to be selected in order to achieve a favorable austenite / ferrite ratio and simultaneously avoid the production of a coarser grained structures in the weld

region, wide heat-affected zones and the precipitation of undesirable, brittle intermetallic phases (1,2,3). It has been reported (4,5,6) that various intermetallic phases (χ, σ and R) if present in the weld metal may have adverse effects on the structure (6). However, it has been shown that the effect of intermetallic phases on the majority of the weld metal properties is only significant at approximately 2 % volume fractions or more (7). Secondary austenite (γ’) has also been identified in the reheated weld beads of DSS and due to the lower Mo, Cr, and Ni contents, such structures exhibited poorer corrosion resistance (8). One way to limit the formation of γ’ in the weld region is to reduce the heat input in the successive passes. Nilsson et al. (8) showed by reducing the heat input, an “as welded” microstructure was produced, devoid of intermetallic phases and with only a small amount of γ’ phase present.

Recently, several authors (9,10) have identified the need to further investigate susceptibility of the welds to IGC i.e. welding parameters and the microstructure of welded regions, with emphasis on cooling rates and heat input. It has also been shown that there is a correlation between secondary austenite and intermetallic phases with the possible initiation of IGC (11).

The aim of this study is to conduct a detailed analysis of two weld sections within a DSS pipeline, as a function of heat input and type of weld, in terms of the residual stress, metallurgical structure, composition and mechanical properties and to assess the susceptibility to IGC.

EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

Welding Conditions

The parent material chosen for the investigation was a 10mm wall thickness, 200mm diameter DSS linepipe corresponding to UNS 31803. The filler material used was the conventional ER2209 AWS A5.9-93 classification. Full details of the chemical composition of both the parent material and filler material are listed in Table 1, confirming that the primary solidification mode was ferrite. Welding was performed using the manual Gas Tungsten Arc Welding (GTAW) technique. The joint configurations adopted was a double bevel single V bevel. Details are given in Table 2. Upon completion of welding, all test conditions were visually inspected for surface defects both internally and externally. Liquid dye penetrant tests were performed 4 hours after completion of welding, and radiography (X-ray) was performed 24 hours later to determine the integrity of the girth welds

C Mn P S Si Ni Cr Mo N Cu Creq Nieq Pipe

0.030

2.0

0.025

0.015

1.0

6.50

23.00

5.50

0.20

0.16

32.04

10.78

Filler Material 0.016 1.69 - - 0.42 8.60 23.07 3.20 0.160 0.16 28.09 11.90

Note; Creq = Cr+1.37Mo+1.5Si+2Nb+3Ti and Nieg = Ni+22C+0.31Mn+14.2N+Cu Table 1. Chemical composition of pipe and filler material.

Page 2 of 9

Weld Condition Weld Pass Travel Speed Heat Input

mm/min J/min

1 (weld root) 51.00 1474.71 2 (weld fill) 123.00 883.12 3 (weld fill) 66.00 1745.45 4 (weld fill) 64.00 1788.00 5 (weld cap) 64.00 1685.63

Condition 1 V groove (403) Average 1515.38

1 (weld root) 45.00 1591.20 2 (weld fill) 105.00 1440.46 3 (weld fill) 79.00 2756.05 4 (weld cap) 94.00 2216.17

Condition 2 V groove ( 404)

Average 2000.97

Table 2 Weld Conditions

Residual Stress Measurements

Residual strain measurements were made using neutron diffraction with a wavelength of 1.40Å on TASS (The Australian Strain Scanner) at the Australian Nuclear Science Technology Organisation (ANSTO), Australia. Residual strains in the ferrite and austenite phases were measured at the locations indicated in Figure 1. Strains were measured in the three directions - longitudinal, transverse and normal (L,T and N) to the welding direction. These were the assumed principal stress directions.

measurement pointmeasurement point

Fig. 1 Schematic drawing of neutron diffraction measurement locations in the welds studied

The measurement of residual elastic strain by monochromatic neutron diffraction relies on the use of Bragg’s law to relate the lattice spacings, dhkl, to the angle of diffraction 2θhkl associated with the diffraction peak labeled by Miller indices hkl at a fixed wavelength. Strain was calculated from the selected planar atomic spacing for ferrite and austenite at discrete locations in the weldment using Eq. 1.

00 /)( hklhklhklhkl ddd −=ε (1)

The calculation of the residual strains requires the knowledge of an appropriate reference lattice spacing 0

hkld . This is problematic in welds where there is a possibility of redistribution of alloying elements, and secondly, inhomogeneous plastic deformation across the weld will generate relatively strong intergranular stresses in DSS. This problem was addressed by cutting a companion slice

2mm thick from the weld and cutting slits every 2mm across it‘s length in order to relieve the macroscopic residual stress field. Thus, the reference measurements 0

hkld represented the lattice spacing as a function of position relative to the weld centre and included any effects of alloy diffusion and intergranular stresses.

DSS polycrystalline aggregates are known to exhibit both elastic and plastic anisotropy, which results in intergranular residual stresses and texture as a consequence of the thermomechanical processing route. The superstition of intergranular residual stresses can lead to errors in measurement of the macroscopic stress field. In this case, the ferrite and austenite lattice spacings were measured using the 211 and 311 diffraction peaks respectively. These hkl values have been observed to behave independently of the intergranular stresses in a similar duplex alloy (12).

The average phase stress was calculated in the L,T and N directions for ferrite and austenite using the generalized Hooke’s law:

( )( ) ( ) ( )[ ]

( )( ) ( ) ( )[ ]

( )( ) ( ) ( )[ ]phaseL

phaseThkl

phaseNhkl

hklhkl

hklphase

N

phaseN

phaseLhkl

phaseThkl

hklhkl

hklphase

T

phaseN

phaseThkl

phaseLhkl

hklhkl

hklphase

L

E

E

E

εενεννν

σ

εενεννν

σ

εενεννν

σ

++−−+

=

++−−+

=

++−−+

=

1211

1211

1211

_

_

_

(2)

Where Εhkl and vhkl and the diffraction elastic constants for each phase. The macroscopic residual stress field was then calculated by weighing the contribution of the respective phase stresses according to Eq. 3,

αγ σσσ NTLfNTLfMacro

NTL VV ,,,,,, )1( +−= (3)

The volume fraction Vf of ferrite was determined from the ASTM E562 point count method.

Page 3 of 9

Mechanical Testing

Ferrite content of the two weld conditions were estimated in terms of % ferrite, using the Magna-Gauge, Fischer ferrite-scope and as a comparison, determined metallographically using the ASTM E562 point count method (13).

Vickers hardness measurements were made with a 10 kg load in the parent material, HAZ, weld cap, weld fill and weld root regions. Transverse tensile test specimens were used to determine the tensile values whilst the more restrictive transverse side bend specimens was used in lieu of the face and root bend tests as required for qualification of welding procedures. Charpy impact tests were performed to assess the notch toughness of samples extracted from the weldments as described in ASTM A923-03 and ASTM A 370 (14)

Intergranular Corrosion Tests (IGC) In the present study a qualitative test method (modified ASTM A262 (22)) was adopted in conjunction with a quantitative test method namely The Double Loop Electrochemical Potentiokinetic Reactivation (DL-ERP) test. Here, as a guideline, the ASTM G108 (14) was used. Modified ASTM A262 Standard Practices E—copper–copper sulfate sulfuric acid test for detecting susceptibility to intergranular attack was used. The specimen was covered with copper shot and grindings and immersed in a solution of 16 wt% sulfuric acid with 6 wt% copper sulfate. The solution was then heated to its boiling point and maintained at this temperature for 48 hours. On removal from solution, the specimen was bent through 180° over a rod with a diameter equivalent to twice the thickness of the specimen instead of four times the thickness to ensure, if cracks appeared, they would be apparent by the more restrictive bending radius. The bent surface of the specimen was then examined for cracks at low magnifications in the range X5 to X20. The Double Loop Electrochemical Potentiokinetic Reactivation (DL-ERP) Tests, as standardized for austenitic stainless steels was considered not suitable for duplex stainless steels, as selective attack of the ferrite occurs during the polarization scan (16). Therefore a modified double loop test was used as conducted by Schultz et al (16,17,18). The solution used was 0.5M H2SO4 + 0.001M TA (thioacetamide). TA is added to reduce the extent of ferrite dissolution. The test was conducted at 60 °C. The polarization scan was started 5 minutes after immersion of the specimen. The potential was scanned from -500 mV (SCE) to +200 mV (SCE) and back to -500 mV (SCE) at a rate of 1.67 mV/s. The ratio of the reactivation charge to the passivation charge was calculated and is shown in the results section.

Magnetic Force Microscopy Analysis

Magnetic force microscopy studies were conducted on metallographically prepared cross-sections of the welds, after grinding and polishing using 3 µm diamond paste. The Scanning Probe Microscopy from Digital Instruments at ANSTO, operating in tapping and lift modes was employed to study the topographic and magnetic features of the DSS samples. Topographic and magnetic force data were taken in the same scan. In order to produce reliable images, repeated scans in different directions were done to ensure reproducibility of the features. Various scan sizes and speeds were tested to enhance height and magnetic induced signals, thus minimizing tip hysteresis and the delay between line scans.

Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) and Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDS) Analysis

SEM and EDS was used to determine the weld surface topographical features and distribution of elements within the ferrite and austenite in the weld region

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The residual stress, microstructure, resulting phase transformation, mechanical properties and degree of susceptibility to IGC are discussed in detail in this section. Table 3 summarises the results of the mechanical properties and IGC tests carried out on the welded duplex stainless steels in this study.

Residual Stress Measurements

Residual phase strains averaged over the diffracting volume (2x2x4mm3) in the longitudinal and transverse directions are shown in Figure 2 for weld condition 1. The results taken at the mid-thickness of the pipe are shown for this case. In the transverse direction, austenite exhibits tensile strains in the weld while the ferrite has contracted lattice spacing. As the distance from the weld centerline increases out to the HAZ (~5mm), an inversion occurs where upon ferrite strains are tensile and austenite is compressive. In the longitudinal direction, the strains for both phases are initially tensile in the weld, although the magnitudes are inverted for each phase in comparison to the transverse direction. In this direction the macroscopic residual stress field is at a maximum, due to constraint impeding contraction of the weld bead during cooling, and it is likely that this is the dominating effect. Moving out from the weld, the HAZ can be clearly distinguished from the weld as both average phase strains become uniformly tensile. This is interesting, in that this area of the weld undergoes transformation back to a completely austenitic structure before transforming partially back to ferrite.

Page 4 of 9

Weld Condition

Weld Pass

Ultimate Tensile Strength

Charpy Impact Test (-43oC) Point Count DL-ERP Test

N/mm2 J % Qr/Qa Ir/Ia 1 (weld root) 41.02 0.04 0.06 2 (weld fill) - - - 3 (weld fill) 38.67 0.09 0.12 4 (weld fill) - - - 5 (weld cap) 43.67 0.04 0.07

Condition 1 V groove (403)

779.59 116

41.12 0.06 0.08

1 (weld root) 35.31 0.05 0.07 2 (weld fill) 36.48 0.08 0.10 3 (weld fill) - - - 4 (weld cap) 46.33 0.02 0.04

Condition 2 V groove ( 404)

794.53 116

39.37 0.05 0.07

Table 3 Summary of the results of the mechanical properties of the welded duplex stainless steels

Mid-Thickness,Transverse Direction

-2500

-2000

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Distance rel. weld centre [mm]

Res

idua

l Stra

in [x

10-6

]

FerriteAustenite

(a)Mid-Thickness, Longitudinal Direction

-2500

-2000

-1500

-1000

-500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Distance rel. weld centre [mm]

Res

idua

l Stra

in [x

10-6

]

FerriteAustenite

(b)

Fig. 2 Residual phase strains for ferrite and austenite as measured by neutron diffraction at the mid-thickness of the pipe in the (a) transverse and (b) longitudinal directions. Weld condition 1.

T r a n s v e r s e

L o n g itu d in a l

N o r m a l

( a )

( b )

( c )

( a )

( b )

( c )

( a )

( b )

( c )

Fig. 3 Neutron diffraction measurement and calculation of the (a) mean ferrite stress, (b) mean austenite stress and (c) volume fraction weighted macroscopic residual stress in the directions normal , transverse and longitudinal to the welding direction [MPa]. The weld geometry relative to the measurement area is as indicated for the longitudinal macroscopic residual stress. Weld condition 1.

Page 5 of 9

The stress state of the weld is complex and there are a host of ways in which the average phase stress may be affected. Stresses in each phase of the material are likely to be affected by elastic mismatch stress, thermal misfits, plastic misfit stresses due to differing plastic behavior between phases as well as transformation stresses. All of these factors apply locally, due to the multi-pass welding operation, but also to the initial stress state of the pipe from the thermomechanical processing history. Overriding all this, long-range residual stresses from the welding process make an interpretation of the short-range phase stresses extremely difficult. Utilization of a model which accounts for texture, elastic and plastic anisotropy and the sources of stresses highlighted is necessary to fully understand the stress evolution. Further work is planned to characterize this behavior, however, this is not within the scope of the study and the current discussion must be limited to the relation, if any, with the IGC results.

In order to convert phase strain to stress (Eq.2) the diffraction elastic constants Εhkl and vhkl for each phase must be known, and these in turn depend on the crystallographic texture of the weldment which varies with position from parent to weld. Given the demanding experimental requirement for the texture at each location in the weld, a best approximation of the diffraction elastic constants was chosen using the self-consistent scheme proposed by Kröner (19) for random texture. Such that, α

211E = 225.5, γ311E = 183.5 GPa, and

αν 211 = 0.28 , γν 311 = 0.31 for the ferrite and austenite phases. The calculated phase and macro stresses (Eq.3) are shown in Figure 3.

In the normal and transverse direction, the HAZ is strongly tensile for ferrite and compressive for austenite. These results suggest tensile ferrite regions could be susceptible to cracking in the HAZ. It is interesting to note that each phase is under very different stress states throughout the weldment. Considering the samples studied do not have the additive operational stresses normally superimposed on the residual stress field, it is quite likely that ferrite could be subjected to large tensile stresses in practice.

Very high compressive stresses were estimated in the austenite phase for the transverse and normal directions, however, these stresses appear to balance by observation of the macroscopic stress field. It is a requirement for stress balance that the macroscopic stress in the normal direction tend towards zero at the surface and this generally true, however, the magnitude of the compressive stress in the austenite 2mm form the ID surface is questionable. A systematic error in the stress free reference may be a likely source of error.

In the weld, the results show both austenite and ferrite to be under tensile stress in the transverse and longitudinal directions. Observation of the macroscopic stress field shows the highest stress to occur in the longitudinal (welding) direction as expected. In the transverse direction, where cracking is most problematic in welds, the highest ferrite phase stresses occur in the mid-thickness of the plate.

Microstructural Evaluation and Magnetic Force Microscopy

Microstructural analysis for both GTAW weld conditions as shown by the magnetic force microscopy (MFM) images in Fig. 4 reveals the presence of a two-phase banded structure, typical of such materials. In general, the austenite regions observed in the DSS weld metal is formed from ferrite in three modes, viz., as allotriomorphs at the prior-ferrite grain boundaries, as Widmanstätten side-plates growing into the grains from these allotriomorphs and as intragranular precipitates. In the micrographs, the grain boundary allotriomorphs and Widmanstätten austenite are clearly seen. However, the austenite seen within the grain could be either intragranular precipitates or Widmanstätten austenite intercepted transverse to the long axis. These microstructures, in addition to the presence of discontinuous grain boundary austenite layers (Fig. 4a) and intragranular acicular ferrite are thought to be associated with variations in transformation rates and the degree of undercooling (20) In summary, these observed microstructures are typical of those formed under such welding conditions.

The topographic image of (Fig. 4d) showed a very flat surface where the only distinguishable features were some contamination particles and a few grinding scratches. From this image, it was not possible to distinguish the distribution of the ferritic and austenitic phases over the surface. On the other hand, the magnetic domain distribution presented in Figs. 4a, 4b and 4c are thought to be associated with the microstructures, typical of th e variousDSS weld regions. The MFM technique was capable of clearly imaging the magnetic domain structure of the ferrite phase that surrounds the “islands” of austenite, appearing flat and uniform due to their paramagnetic properties. Clear bands of ferrite could be easily distinguished, but a closer look revealed other regions of ferrite that did not exhibit the more typical striped magnetic domain configuration, similar to the ferrite regions.

Page 6 of 9

\

Fig. 4 MFM Image of DSS; a) Root region associated with weld condition 1, b) Fill region associated with weld condition 1, c) Fill region associated with weld condition 1, d) Topographical image of weld condition 1

Inter Granular Corrosion Tests

Modified ASTM A262 Standard Practices E Test The absence of cracks on the surface of the bent specimens, even under restricted and reduced bending radius, in accordance with ASTM A262 Standard Practices E, indicates no evidence of sensitization in all weld conditions. Modified DL-ERP test The test efficiency was measured by means of a response test, which was characterized by weak values of the current density ratio (Ir/Ia <1%) and the charge ratio (Qr/Qa < 1%) for nonsensitized materials, and relatively high ratio values (Ir/Ia

≥1%) and (Qr/Qa ≥ 1%) for high-sensitized materials. The reverse polarization from the passive to the active region gave rise to a reactivation peak, the magnitude of which is sensitive to the degree of alloy element depletion. The susceptibility to corrosion was characterized in terms of both the ratio of the reactivation-current peak to the activation current peak as well as the ratio of the reactivation charge to the activation charge (21). Both Ir/Ia and Qr/Qa results are represented graphically in Fig. 5. Analysis of the results shows that the fill region for both conditions had a higher degree of sensitization (DOS) compared to the root and cap region of the weld. This correlates with the neutron diffraction measurements of the average phase stress, where tensile ferrite and austenite stresses were observed to be at

a b

cd

Page 7 of 9

Degree of Sensitization

0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

10.00%

12.00%

14.00%

16.00%

18.00%

20.00%

Base Material Cond.1 Fill Cond.2 Fill Cond.2 Root Cond.1 Cap Cond.1 Root Cond. 2 Cap

Ir/Ia

Qr/Qa

a maximum in the fill region of the weld in the transverse direction The results of this study confirm the usefulness of the DL-EPR method in evaluating quantitatively the sensitization of the DSS

weld regions in accordance with previous studies (16-18). The DL-EPR method has the advantage of being a fast and quantitative test that can easily be incorporated into the monitoring of equipment to identify IGC in particular. (21).

. 5 Results of D

Fig. 5 Results of DL-ERP showing DOS of Condition 1 and 2 in terms of Qr/Qa and Ir/Ia

Fig. 6 - a) SEM image of Cap in Condition 1 etched with 15% NaOH, b1) EDS analysis of Austenite in Cap region of Condition 1, b2) EDS analysis of Ferrite in Cap region of Condition 1, c) DL-ERP plot of Root, Fill and Cap region in Condition 1 showing difference in DOS in 0.5M H2SO4 + 0.001 M TA, d) Anodic Polarization curve of Root, Fill and Cap region in Condition 1, 0.5M H2SO4 + 0.001 M TA.

Page 8 of 9

Structural Analysis of Corroded Weld Regions

EDS analysis was performed on all weld locations of condition 1, to determine the distribution of elements present in the austenite and ferrite phases and to provide confirmation of the mechanisms by which phase transformations were occurring. Scanning electron micrographs, corresponding compositional analysis and DL-ERP polarization curves are shown in Fig 6.

CONCLUSIONS

1. As a consequence of the varying heat inputs from 1.6kJ to 2.0 kJ , for the two different weld conditions, there was a move towards the development of a structure containing 35-47% ferrite. This suggests that control of heat input was not a significant factor in influencing the specific weld metal mechanical properties within the conditions specified. It was established that there was no relationship between the percentage ferrite content in the notch region and the corresponding toughness.

2. Microstructure of the weld metal as detailed in Fig. 4 shows a typical “as weld” structure, resulting in the formation of both fine and coarse structure within the weld metal. This was thought to be associated with variations in transformation rates and the degree of undercooling.

3. It was shown the MFM is a powerful tool to use for differentiating the austenite and ferrite phase in duplex stainless steel.

4. Both conditions passed the qualitative type IGC tests even under restricted and modified conditions.

5. The DL-ERP test results revealed that the fill area for both conditions and the base material had the highest values for Ir/Ia and Qr/Qa.

6. Residual stress measurements by neutron diffraction revealed that the ferrite phase stress was tensile in the HAZ and weld and appeared to be balanced by a local compressive austenite phase stresses in the normal and transverse directions. The results showed that for ferrite and austenite, a maximum tensile stress is formed in the fill section of the weld and decreases in the root and cap regions for the transverse direction.

7. A correlation was observed between the stress / strain distribution in the DSS weld regions and the degree of susceptibility to IGC

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors would like to express their gratitude to AINSE and ANSTO for provision of funding for support towards this research program (AINSE Award AINGRA06184). In particular, the authors wish to gratefully acknowledge the experimental assistance of Dr Maurice Ripley, Dr Ken Short and Dr Michael Law.

REFERENCE

1. A.J Ramiraz, J.C. Lippold and S.D. Brandi, Metallurgical and Materials Transaction A, Vol. 34A, Aug 2003, pg. 1575-1597.

2. N. Stephenson, Welding and Metal Fabrication, 55, 5 and 6, 1987, 159-164.

3. R.N. Gun, Editor, Duplex Stainless Steels,: Microstructure, Properties and Applications, Abington Publishing, Cambridge, England, 1997.

4. L. Karlsson, L. Ryen, and S. Pak: Weld J , 1995, 74, 28s-40s.

5. J.O. Nilsson and P. Lru: Mater. Sci. Technol., 1991, 853 - 862.

6. A. Radjaeivia, G. Metur, and M. Gantois: Proc. Conf. Duplex Stainless Steels '91, Beaune, France, October 1991, Societe Frangaise de Metallurgie et de Mantriaux, 119-126.

7. L. Karlsson: Proc. Conf. Duplex Stainless Steels '97, Maastricht, The Netherlands, October 1997; Stainl. Steel World, 1997, 43-58.

8. J.-O. Nilsson, L. Karlsson, and J.-O. Andersson: Mater. SCL. Technol., 1995, 11, (3), 276-283.

9. S. JANA: `Innovation stainless steel', 3.343-3.348; 1993, Florence, Associazione Italiana di Metallurgia.

10. S. Atamerat and J. E. King: ACta. Metall, 1991, 273-285.

11. H. J. Yu: Proc 4th Int. Conf. on Trends in Welding Research, 87-92; 1995, Materials Park, OH, ASM International.

12. M.T. Hutchings, P.J. Withers, T.M. Holden, T. Lorentzen, Introduction to the Characterisation of Residual Stress by Neutron Diffraction, CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, Florida, United States, 2005, p.212-213.

13. ASTM E562, Standard Test Method for Determining Volume Fraction by Systematic Manual Point Count

14. ASTM A370, Standard Test Methods and Definitions for Mechanical Testing of Steel Products

15. ASTM G108, Standard Test Method for Elect rochemical React ivat ion (EPR) for Detect ing Sensi t izat ion of AISI Type 304 and 304L Stainless Steels

16. S. Schultze, J. Gollner, K. Eick, P. Veit, I. Garz, “ The modified EPR test: A new tool for examination of corrosion susceptibility of duplex stainless steel”, Duplex ’97, Paper D97-067, KCI Publishing, Zutphen, The Netherlands (1997), p 639.

17. A. Turnbull, P.E. Francis, A.J. Griffiths, E. Bennett, W. Nimmo, “Measurement of Corrosion Resistance of Super-Duplex Stainless Steel Welds by Electrochemical Techniques,” Eurocorr” 2000 (London, U.K.: Institute of Materials, 2000).

18. E. Otero, C. Merino, C. Fosca, P. Fernandez, “Electrochemical Characterization of Secondary Phases in a

Page 9 of 9

Duplex Stainless Steel by EPR Test,” Duplex ’94, paper no. 56 (Cambridge, U.K.: TWI, 1994).

19. E. Kröner, Berechnung der elastischen konstanten des vielkristalls aus den konstanten des einkristalls, Z. Physik. 151, 1958, p.404-418.

20. L. Karlsson: 'Intermetallic Phase Precipitation in Duplex Stainless Steels and Weld Metals: Metallurgy, Influence on

Properties and Testing Aspects', Welding in the World, vol. 43, no. 5, 1999.

21. T. Amadou, C. Braham, and H. Sidhom; Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A Vol. 35A, Nov. 2004—3499

22. ASTM A262, Standard Practices for Detecting Susceptibility to Intergranular Attack in Austenitic Stainless Steels