.:.,,..

.. -.., -.,,,. -.

~,...

‘,

.’!;

.. .,,:..- ”..

-> . . . :

.-

,;.’

,,

,)

1,

1,

,.

‘1

,’

.!

‘,-., .,

,. (y,”,1. 1

,,. .

,. 1,

,, SE,RI@ -NO. SSC-45,,~,&

COPY NO. [,- u—.

. . FINAIJ REPORT ~ ,’, ~

ON ,,.

EVALUATION OF -IMpROVED MATERIALS AND METHODS OF’FABRICATION FOR WELDED. STEEL SHIPS , ~,

,“,,’-.”’

... .,, ‘. ~ BY ,“

,,

,.

F. R. BAYSINGE~ P. J. ,RIEPPEL ANB C. -B. VOLDRICH

1,

.;

./

. .

1,

,’>

,“

,.

,,

BATT.ELLE MEMORIAL INSTITUTE

l-hider Bureau of. Shim contract NOb~-4~01~(Inp No. NS-01}067)

,- ,’

,,Transmiit*d through

.’ NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL’S ,,’ /’

I

COMMITTEE ON SHIP STEEL

SHIP STRUCTURE COMMITTEErmdw,,., .~”

Bureau of Shi~ Navy Dep&ment

~”Contract NObs.5014S

,.

,.I

,-

.,

,-

. .

‘.,

),.

1’

Division of Engineering pnd Industrial Reumrch

‘ ~ “Ndional Aqadepy of Scienc& - National,’

Washington, D. C.,.

.. December 20, 1951

Research Cauncil,.,1

,.. . ,.

.

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL21o1CONSTITUTION AVENUE,WASHINGTON25,D.C.

COMMITTEE ON SHIP STEEL

OFTHEDIVISIONOFENGINEERINGANDINDUSTRIALRESEARCH

December 20, 1951

Dear Sirt

Attached is RePar~ serial No. SSJ3-45entitled‘lEval.uationcf Trqrwed Matmials and Methods of Fabricationfor Weld~d Steel Ships.” !lThisreport has been submitted bythe contractor as a ?l-nalReport of work com~leted for theShip Structure Committee on Research ProJect SR-1OO un&m-Contraut NObs-48015 (1773)between the Bureau of Ships,Departmmt of the Navy and Battelle Memorial Institute.

The report has hem reviewed and acceptanw recotn-mended 13yrqresentatives of the ComQittee on Ship Steel,Division of Hngineerirg and Industrial Research, NRC, inaccordsme with the terms of the contract betwen the Bureauof Ships, Department of the NWW and the National Academy ofSciences.

Very truly yours,

J?.E. Kyle, Chmi%ancommittee 011 Ship St@@l

Advisorytothe SHIPSTRUCTURE COMMITTEE, a committee representing the combined researchuc~iviiiesofthe membw agencies -

Bureau Oj Ships, Dept. of Navy; Military Sea Transportation ser~ice, ~ept, OfNUW United States Coast Guard, Treaw-y Dept.;

n)r-.i$i-n AJ.vn.im;efm!;nm.7)wnt,.nfCommerce.American Bureau of Shiwnina.

FINAL REPORT

on

EVALUATIOX OF TIWROV!IDMATEPJALS AND METHODS OFFAWKATION FOR WELDED STE3L SHIPS

Im

,.

J3ATTELLEMEMORIAL INSTITUTE

~TABLE OF ~ONTi!3NTS...,‘.I—.-’-—.

IHTRODUtiTION. . . . . . . . . **** .

●

●

✎

●

,’.

●

4

.

.

●

●

●

●

✎

✎

.

●

●

✎

●

✎

●

●

✎

✎

●

●

●

✎

✎

●

●

w

.

*

●

.

●

●

●

●

●

●

*

●

.

.

.

*

●

.

●

●

✎

✎

✎

●

●

●

●

●

●

✎

✎

●

●

●

9

.

.

9

●

m

●

o

●

8

●

.

*

●

9

.

●

●

●

●

*

●

●

.

9

●

EVEJJATIOIJOF TIZSTJFOiiRATING 3?p

$

Tests with,.

Tests with

Tests with

Tee-Bend Specimen,,

Lehigh-Type ipecimen

Naval Research Laboratory Specimen 9,, -.Tacksor.-’TypeSpecimen . .,.. ,,

9

9

.**..

Tests Using iiotchedTension Specimen,’.,

Discussion of Results from Evaluationon Test Specimens

● ✎☛☛

titiudies*.*.

11

,.11@valuation of FfiojectSteels ● **..

Variations from Jtandard Kinzel-Type Specimens

Influence of .E6G20Electrodes onTransition Range .**..

.

●

✎

6

.2

.

*

.

*

.

●

●

✎

●

✎

✎

12

13

Influence of Spectieilliidthon Transition-TernperatureRange ● =8=.94

,,. . . ..!Influence of Notch Depth on Transitio&Temperature Range ● ● .“? ● ● 6

.,, ,

13

u

Effect of Thermal Treatments on Kinzel-T.ypetipecimensof ‘t~lland ~lCflSteels . . .-’,- ,, . . .

Effect of Preheats and Fostheat on llBrllSteel

v “u

●

✎

●

●

●

,, ,, ..

Effect of Preheats and Postheat on !IC!Ihteel 15:,.,

CWiCK INITIATION AND PROPAGATION ~TUO12iSKINZEL-TWE SPECIIKENS ,.,

Crack Initiation

Crack Propagation

Interpretation of the BehaviorSpecimens

OF

of

17

17

m

. . .

. . .

● m*

itinzel-Type.**** . 19

TAHLE OF CONTIHVTS(continued) “————

... .

●

✎

✎

✎

20” “’

C.RACK+iNSIi’IViT~T@:TLmA,NJIT~E.-J,OINT,l~~~h OF AB~ C~S~ B ~1~,~C ST~

f. ,, .+, ,,.Underbead Crack-’bwm.itivity Tests .

.-, . . ..Tee-Joint Tests

-,,’...*.

,, .,Tee-J&nt Spectien an~ ;rocedure

,.. rRelation between Underbeau Cr”ackand Crackifidin Tee,-Joints ..

,:,

22,.

. . .

1,, .

. . . ..

.

.

23. . . .*. .

24,.;

25

● ✎ ✎

✎✌✌

● ✎ ✎ ✎

-’: :,,,, ,

. . . . .,,,.,,

.

.

.

.**..

.

“

.

.

●

.

.

●

.

.

●

.

.

.

●✌ ✎✌

●

✎

✌

✎

●

✎

m.

● J

.J

.,.,

Sensitivity26 ‘* ● ✎ ✎ ✎ ✎ ● ✎ .’.. J. ●

.*. *

,.Relation Eetween’~Qectrode Types and

Cracking ~ Tee-Joints ., ,. . ,.. . .

Effects ~f Homogenization and Preheat.,oni,

26”<

27in Tee-Joints .. *.*..,. ,. .. ,>, ,

‘Lffect of Balanced Welding ~equence onCracxifigin Tee–Joints . .,,.....

.

.

●

✎

9

●

.

.

●

.

.

.

●

.

.

.

.

.

,

.

●

✎

●

●

●

✎

✎

✎

✎

●

●

●

●

●

✎

●

✎✌✎

✎

✎

✎

●

●

●

●

27,,..~

Addit~o&l Tests to Study Cracking inthe Joints . :.. ,. .

Discussion of Results ‘ . . .

COhJCLUDI!TGSTAT@d+NT:,CONC”~NIl;~’tiNDMl.BtiL)

27

2e

.,..

,.*

MID TEIU-JOII!TCRACKING

RECOiMNMTICNb-FOR FURTHJ

● ✎

✌✎

RE@LPLCH ON,

.

●

✎

✎

✎

.

●

✎

✎

✎

●

●

●

●

✎

.

●

✎

✎

✎

●

✎

✎

✎

●

●

●

✎

✎

●

TEE-JOINT CfLICKIXG

.+FIGURES

,.APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B ,.

. . .

.,

●

●

●

✎

9

.

.-

The Navy Department through the Bureaa of Ships is distributing this‘eport for the SHIP STRUCTURE COMWT’TEE to those agencies and individuals..,,.who were actively associated with the research work. This report represe~ltsresults of part of the research program conducted:under the bhip Sti”uciureCommitteers directive to ‘ttiprovethe hull structures of ships by an =x-”teusim of knowledge pertaining to design, materials and methods of fabrica-tion’~*

The distribution of this report is as follows:,,

Copy l;o. 1 -&)Py NG. 2 -

copy 1{0. 3 -copy w. 4 -COPY iio. 5 -copy No. 6-copy 1!0. 7 -

‘.

copy ho. e -copy No* 9 -copy No. 10 -copy rJo*11 -Copy lie,12 -copy i$io,13 -copy rio. 14-copy No, 15 -copy~os 16 -CopyNo~ 17-Copy lie.18 -copy No. 19 -Copy No. 20 -copy No* 21 -Copy No. 22 -copy i\Os 23 -~OJ3y };0, 24 -COPYNOe 25 -cOpy~O* 26-COPY NO, 27 -Copy No, 28 +copy~~Om 29 -

copy No. 30-CopyNo. 31-

.- ,.

Chief, Bureau of Shipsj Navy DepartmentDr. D. W. 13rork,President, National Academy of ScierIces

Ship Structure Committee ‘,

“ear Admiral Ji.K. Cowart, UbCG - Chiirman ‘.LLRear Admiral R. L. Hicks, UJJ, (Ret.], Maritime MmitiistrationRear Admiral E. i. Sylvester, USN, bureau of ShiFs,CaptainW.,N. Mansfield, UbNR, Military Sea Transportation Serv,D. P. Brown,:”AmericanBureau of Shipping

Ship Structure Subcommittee,,

,,. .,

Capt. E. A. ~J@~~t, ~si’J,Bureau of Ships - ChairmanComdr. E. A. Grantham, USl~;Mlitary bea Transportation Serv.Comdr. D. B. Henderson, USCS, U.S. Coast Guard Headqu&rtersLt. Comdr. M. N. P. Hinkamp, USN, Bureau of Ships;Lt. Comdr. E. L. Perry, USCG, U. b. Coast Guard HeadquartersJohn W7dey, Office of Naval Research

.,

W, G. Frederic~j Ylritine Administration ‘ ..

Hubert Kernpel,Military Sea Transportation Seriv “M. J. Letich, American Bureau of Shipping’ i ,.,.

L. C. Host, American Bureau of tihipping “ ;“.-E. hi. hiacCutcheon,Jr., Bureau of ShipsV. L. Russo, Maritime Administration

,-,

Finn Jonassen, Liaison Representative,,NRC ‘ “’E. H. Davidson, Liaison Representative, /iLSi JW. P. Gerhart, Liaison Represefitative,AISIWm. Spraragen, Liaison Representative> WCCharles Hoch, Military Sea Transportation Serv., Alt. MemberW. E. Magee, U. S. Coast Guard, Alternate ItiembeiJ. B. Robertson, Jr., U. S. Coast”Guard, ~lternate M&mberJohn Vasta, Bureau of Lhips, Alternate Member ,.”

R. E. Wiley, Bureau of Ships, Alternate MemberEdward Wenk, David Taylor Model Basin, Alternate Member

,.

Com@ttee on Ship Steel., ,...

P. E.”Kyle”- ChairmanC. H. HertiyjJr., - Vice Ehairman

., .,,,,. .,, ?,< ,.,!:, .,,.,”.,.,. ,,. ?“:

- .ii-

“’”Comrriittee dn Ship 5teel (Gor.kued);-.,,,,,

.,. . . ,.

cowrJo.32- Wm. h. Baldwiri,Jr.copy No. 33- C. S’.%rrettCopy No;3L-li. ti.Brick ‘“;,Copy No. 35’-SsL.’;Ho@Copy No. 13 - John Crowleycopy No. 36- li.“J.LightnerCopy No.”37-R. F. Me&copy No. 3$-- T. S. lfashburncopy NO* 20 - Finn Jonassen - Technical DirectorCopy No. 39 - A. IvMller- Consultant

,. .; .,’. . . .

,.,. . .. ‘.

.’,,

Members of Project Advisory Committees SR-98, SR-99, LPL-1OO,SR–108, SR-109,,W-110 and SI&lll (not fisted elsewhere)

,,~’h ..- ..

GopyNo. 40- R. H..Kborfi .~- ,“~ ..4 ..:.

copy No. 41 - E. A. Anderson. ..’. -,.> .,

Copy No. & - L. “C.Bibber,,

copy NO. /!+3.,,

- Morris Cohencopy No. f+f+- W. C. Ellis ,copy No. 45 - hi.GemsamercOpy l!iO. 46- N.F. HawkesCopy No. 47 - W. F. HessCopy No. .@ - W. R. Hibbard, Jr.copy No. 49 - C= ‘E.Jacksoncopy No. 50 - C. %. Low$ Jr. ,.Copy No. jl - H. V. PierceCopy No, 52 - W. A. iieich .,:

Copy NO. 53 - C. E. SimscOJ3y]:Q. 54 -R. D. Stout .,.copy No. 55 - J. G. Thompsoncopy r:o.X’ - U. H. Wooding, Philadelphia Naval Shipyard

Committee cm Residual Stresses ‘

Copy hTo.58- J. T. lXortun* ChairmanCOPY NO. 32 - Wm. W Baldwiq Jr.Copy No. 59- Paul Ffieldcopy~~o. 60- LeVan Griffiscopy ~~Oi 61 - K. HeindlhoferCopy No. 62 - Daniel Rosenthalcopy NO. 20 - Finn Jonassen - Technical Director

U. S. Navy

Copy Noti63 - Capt. R. H. Lambert, USN, Philadelphia Naval ShipyardCopy I\lo.64- Capt. C. hi.Tooke, USN, Long Beach Naval Shipyard ,

., , . .: . .’.~.- .! .:-..,,

- iii -....,, ,, -..,

lJoS. Navy (GOritinU~~] , ~~ ~~ i , ,., .. . .

COPY NO. 65- ~omdr...H.G. bower, US?V,,Code Re-3, Qureau of CWdnanceCopy No. 66 - Comdr..”Ft.S. kiaiidelkorn,USN Armed Forces Specj.all~eaponsProj’.copy Iioo67 - A+ drikian, ‘Wreauof Yards and Dockscopy~o. 6? - A.,G. hL!3ell, Bweati Qf ShipS ,,

!.,

COpy NO; 69-,,.

,J~W. Jwkins, Bureau of,Shi~s ,copy.No. 70 - Carl H~it~ower~ NavaL IL&$eatchLaboratory ,’Copy No. 71 – R. H. ’Raring,Naval %search Laboiatotiy’COpyl;Oa 72 - IJotii. khn; New York Naval Shipyard

- G.,T..Marzke, Navai Research Laboratorycopy No.,73.,

Copy r{o.74- j{.E,;‘ilcl{enziejliet~lu.rgicalBranch, Naval Gun Factory ‘-CopyNo. 7S - J. E..McCamhridge; Industrial Testing Lati.,Philau NavaL ShipyardCOJ2Y]\~O.76- l!J_E.”Promisel, bureau Qi AeronauticsCopy }To.77 - Naval Research Labbratdry

\ -- ,,

copy MO. 78- Naval,lleq~archLaboratory; Nechanicai Section ‘“’copy NO. 79 - Naval fikse~~chLa~oratory; Metallurgical Sectioncopy No. 80 - Post Graduate School’,U. S: Raval Lcademy

,’

Copies No. 81 and 82-’ U. S. Naval Engir.ieeringExpeiim~nt StationCopy lfo.83 - New York Naval Shipyard, Material Laboratory,Copy No. g4 - IndUstrial Testing Laboratory ,.,

copy No. @ - Philadelphia Naval Sh&pyard .copy ]io. 86-‘SanF~ancisc~ NaiaL Shipyard

,’. “

Copy iio.87-Copies No. 88

David Tay~or Model Basin, Attn: Library ‘ ‘;~d-89 - Technical Library; Bureau of &hips,Code 364’,.

Copy No. 90 -CopyNos 91 -copy hO. 92 -Copy No. 93 -,copyNo. 94-

COPYNO*95-Copy No. 96-

. . .U. S. Coast Guard

Capt: ‘R..ti.Lank, Jr., U&CG,., !,,

Capt. H. C. iloore,USCG,.

Capt. G. A. Tyler, USCGTesting and Development DivisionU. S. Coast Guard Academy, }JewLondon ,,

U. S. Maritime Administration >..,

Vice Admiral E. L. Cochrane, W5N (Ret.)E. E.,Martinsky ,,,,

Representative: of merican ’Ironand’Steel Institute,,h .,Committee on LianufacturingFro,blems ,

,.

CopyNo. 97.- C. 11.Parkerj Secreiarj, General TechnicalCqruitteey AIS1Copy No. 42 - L. C. Bibber, U. S. L}eel CogCopy fro.31- G.H. Herty, Jr., Sethlehem SteSl Co. “.

copy ho. 9$ - E. C. Smith, Republic Steel Corp. ..,

.-,.

,,

\..

. .

,,,

..’

,.. ,,-, ,’: . . .

COpy No- 9< ’-.C: ‘A:-Adam:..” ‘. . ;!;’; ,Copy.i]O~+1 -,Lal&tte G@i,:copj No.”lw - Harry Boardman ‘“copyNo. 23 ,-,. Wm. Spraragen.

— 7, ...,., ,,

cGpy NO. 102,,

- C. ,R. Soderbei-g,Chairman, Di~;,,~nginewi~g{,:&In{ust~i~ .. ~,.Research,,NRC . , ,.,,

Copy NO. 30-.P. E. Kyle, khairman, Co@ttee on Ship Ste&’:.:’ ~,‘,,,

copy Fe.” 20 - Finn Jonassen~,T,ech.nical:.D~ector,committee on.sh~p$tetil: .“,’~copy No. 103 - F,,R. i3aysinger,~Ve&t,igat@r,,Researcnzroject, L&2QO~. “’.,. :.Copy No. 104,-R. G. Kline,~inve:~igator.,~H&search pro~ect,SRtil~O’ , ‘, .,,:.:

,,-

Copy NO. 105 ~’P. J.’hi&ppel,.Lnvestigator,llesearchProject Sh-1~0~ ;~~~,i ., ,COpy No. 106 - C, B, Voldrich, Investigator, Research P~ojectS,~-}00,~Copy No. 107 - S. T. Carpenter,,Lnves:tigator,Research,Projecfs $3v,9~;Iti~-lld.

COPY NO. 32 - lti..:,~~:tiqldwin,Ji:.,Investigator,lles~Projecti~SR-99.,.S%lll-Copy ~iO.108 - L. J. EbertY Investigator, tiesearchPro;ect sR-99 ‘“ ~~copy No* 109 - ~. ,J.Klingler, Investigator,Re~earch Projpct SR-95’ ““, ~, ..Copy No. 110- 1[.L. l.~~i~iams,National Wrqaq”,.ofStandards, Res. Pro~~ct SFS106copy NO, 111 - G. L. KIuge, Investigator,~ese&ch Proj.eyt@-106 “ ‘ “,:Copy rJo*112 - M. R. Meyerson, Investigator, Re&&arch Project SR-106, ;. , ,Copy No. 37-R. 7’.Liehl,Investigator, Research Project SR-108, ~ ,Copy No. 113- D, Van lTitil@,,:Investiga&or,ResearchProject SR–108 ‘ , -..,Copy No. 34- R, M. B1-~ck,Investigator;,Researcn project SR-1C9 .Copy No. 114 - C. H, Lorig, fi.vestigatar,Researci~Project SH-11O

,,

Copy No. li5 - E. li.Suppiger;Investigator? Research Project SR-lQCOpy NO. 116- E. R, Ward, Investigator, Research Project S~-wcopy !Xoai17 - ,,Research P~Oject SR-lQ ,.. : .,Carlo Riparbelli, Investigatorcopy NO. 11$ - S. V. Arnold$ Investigator, Research’Prqject S&l14copy No. 19 - V. L. Russo, Investigator,

...Research Project SR-117

cQpyNo* 11$?- R. A. Hechtman, Inv6stiga~or, Resea7,:hPrpject SR-119 ,.copy No* 120 - G. S. llikhala~ov,l,Investi~ator, Res?arch ?rtij~@.SR-120Copy l!llo.121 - L. Crawford, Investigator, Research Project W-121Copies No. 122 and 123 - Army,A!LrM~teriai -Command,Wright Fieldcopy No. 124 - Clarence A~tenburgery Great Lakes Steii Co.copy Nod X25 - J. G. Althous,ej.Lukegs S~eel Co.copY No. 126 - T. N. Arustrong, The bternational Nickel Co., Inc. ‘ “Copy No. 127- British Shipbuilding Research Association: Attn: J.C. Asher’~Secfy.copy No. 128 - ,S.Epsiein, Beth@hem Steel Co.COpy No. 129 - A. E. Flanigan, University of California ‘,Copy No. 130 - W. J. Harris, Jr., Metallurgical Advisory Board, NHCCopies No, 13>.through 15~,- E. G. Hill, British.Joint Servi:es Mission,(Navybta@copy]~oti156- 0. J. Horger, Timken Rd.ler.Bearing Co.copy No. 157 - L. R. Jackson, Hattelle’Le,~orialInstitute .Copy NO. 158- K. V. i<ing,Standard Oil Co. of Galifor@aCopy rio.159 - E. P. Klier, University of Maryland ‘

,.,

COpy NO. 160- W. J. Krefeld, Columbia UniversityCcIpyNo. 161 - R. C. ~iadden,Kaiser Co., Inc.

-v-

,,.?Copy No. 162- NACA, Attn: Materials Research Coordination, Navy 3,ept.cOpy NO. 163 - N. M. NewmarkJ University or IIMmoisCopy NO, 164- E. Orowan, Div5Lsionof Mechanical Engineering, MiTCopy l;o.165 - ~~tiG. perry, ~, Division~ Joint Services Mission [Navy Staff)copy NO. 166- Walter Ramberg, National Bureau of Standardscopy No, 167

,,- L. J. Rohl, U. S. Steel Co.

COpy NO. 168- W. P. Roop, Swarthmore College .,!copy No* 169 - H. A. Schade, University of Californiacopy No. 170- Saylor Snyder, U. b. bteel Co.

.4

copy NO. 171 - E. G. Stewart, Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey ,!:

Copy No. 172 - R. G. Sturm, ?m’due Universitycopy No. 173 - A. R. Troiano, Case Institute of Technology

.-.’,.

copy No= 17,4- R. W. Vanderkeck, U. S. Steel Co. ,!.,.

copy No. 175 - T. T. Watson, Lukens Steel Co..!, .,

cop~~~om 176 - Webb Institute of Nav@ Architecture .Copy }:o”177- Georges Welter, EcolePolyt.echni@e InstituteCopy rio,178 - L..T. Wyly,Purd~~eUniversitycopy No* 1?9 - Division of Metallurgy, National Sureau of btandardscopy No* 1s0 - T1-ansportationCorps Board, Brookl~m, N. Y.Copies No. 181 through 185 - Library of Congress via Bureau of Ships, Code 32LCOFYNO. 186 - G. A. 2apffe, Carl A. Zapffe Laboratorycopy No. 187 - File Copy, Committee on Ship SteelCopies No. 188 through i92 - Bureau of Shipscopy No. 193 -copy No. 194-copy No= 195 -copy]~o. 196-copy No* 19? -copy NO* 198 -copy No. 199 -Copy No. 200 -copy No. 201 -copy NO* 202 -Copy NO. 203 -copy I(o.204-copy No* 2s5 -Copy No. 236 -COpy NO. 207 -copy Nom 208 - ‘COpY NO. 2CJ9-copy Nom 210-Copy Hom 211 -copy NO. 212 -Copy NO. 213 -COpy NO. 214 -COpy NO. 215 -copy No. 216 -

-yi -

COPY No. 217 -copy No= 218-

,’.,1~,.

copy No. 219 -Copy,i~o.220- : ,’cop~”No. 2fi -Copy rio.22.2- “ ‘“COPY No. 223 -Copy No. 224-COpYNo Q 225-

,.. .,, :...!

,, :., .

, . ... . ....+

.,

.....,, ,

1.’,”

.-...,, “<

,.

.’ ,’.

‘“(~O&’&&$ ?25)!.,’,,’,.

..,.,

,.,!

,.

,.

., !

.,.

,.., r.

,~.,.’.

..:,1. ,.

,,: ,, .,

. ’,’.:,:.,..

... ,..

,.. . .

,. .’!,.

,,, !,;.

. ..’, .,

,..

,..m,. ,

.,,,, .,.’., -“’. ,,.,., . :’, ,.

.,,,

,’

,., ,

....,,

,;

i.,

,.,,..’.,

,:

‘,,:

.,)

,.>

~,

,. ’.. .’,

.’, ,::

.,, ., ,

,,: ,,1’

.’! !,:

,.

,’

..

,..

,,

,1:....

,.

u,.

.:.

. . . . .

,,

,,,.,. .

.,. :,,,.,

:-

. ,.

;.....,, ,.

.-

FINAL REIWRT,,.

on,: .,,, .<

E“V.UATION OF J3YEPROVEDMATERIAM AND l!fiETEOlX5OF,.FABRICATION FOR ~~HD smL SI+TPS

,,

.. . .

;!.’

.,

‘BIEIEAUOF SHIPS, .! ;...””.NA~ ~p~T~NT

.,>., , ;,,

from.,, :

BATTELLE iJEMOIWXLINSTIT”U’TE

by.:. .

F. R. Baysinger~ P. J. Rieppel, and O i B. Voldrich

1 ,.

Summarizing Work Completed gn Project : .. ~SR.1OO Under Contract NObs=,45543,andContract NObs-48015 (1773) I~dex No. .,

Ns-oll-067

This is the final report on Navy Department, Bureau of Ships,

Project SRV1OO, aut-horiz~dby Contract NObs4&Oi5 (1773) Index No. NS-

011.s067,entitl.edi~valuati~nof Improved Materials and Methods of FabrI-..,.

cation ‘forWelded Steel Shipstt. This report summarizes work’done during

‘the periotiJune 25$ .1947;to December 30, 1950. Progress Reports++prepared

‘under-thiscontract are Ship Structure Committee Reports Serial NOS. “SSC-23,,-.

;’ Mar.”30; 1949; SW-33++*, NOV; 15, 1949; =C-34, DeCW 20~ _1950; SSC-40, Oct.

.- 1,1951; and SSC-41~ Oct. 1, 1951..,. . ..

WA pdpe~ ‘lfEvaluationof Tests for Steels for l/elded”Structures”,by P. J.,.,Rieppel, R. G.Kline and C. B. Voldrich, Weldin~ Journal, Vol. .25,April, 1950,

PP 1955-216s, also describes work cwnpleted under this contract.+&n extensive Bibliography appears in Append& ‘tC~tof this report.

-2-

TMs project had three:@j~tLve~,~ The pzlxc~pai objective was....,,

to evaluate the ussfukess of variouz mecha~iicaltests of small welded,-

steel specimen. for,i~dicating,th~,?~~ba~lep~~fomance of large welded,.” ,. ,,

strLlctures● Another object~ve was to study the ‘fundamentalfactors

contributing to the performance of such welded laboratory specimens. The

last objective was to evaluate th&&ei$gad crack sensitivity of a series “,

of steels made to American Bureau pflShipping specifications.

Work done toward finding a.test for evaluating sted.s for large,. ..

.wel.dedstructures sta_*tedwith a literature surveyM of tests used pre-

viously to-study the qralities.gf:welds in steel and the wel.dabilityof... -.

steels. From the results of the survey$ five types of tests which seemed

most promising for further study were selected. Of the five types of:,,..,,.,.. ,

tests selected,and studied,’thpK~~~~l,k6tit’:~singnotched weld-bead spaci-,,.

men

the

n~ll

...’ . ... . ?., ... .,”, .-~.

was used for the’mjo~:,.p~~+”otthe”work~‘p~rticuiarlyto determine4,

transition-temperatureranges of project steels ‘lBml~,‘lCtl~‘Ati)and,... .,

and to determine the micr:omedhani~ti’~f

ga~~n:,as:aiguJdp to.the interpretation of,,

~At.jt~estait, a.premise was.s~ljyp,,.;,,,,.

A

fracture initiation and propa-

theresd.tsm ,- ~

foy this investigation th~$~

.,~fthe~ra~sition-temperatme,range,wtich’ had pre,~ously been deteyrnined

far the full-scale hatch-corner specimen,,was %tched by that of a small

~pecimen of the same steels, the small specimen would be.~?ful in predict-.-

ing the performance of s$e~ls im,la~ge welded structures in general. To,.

ttis,end, various modificatl.onswere made in the desi~ of the Kinzel-type...

,’ ,,

specimen and in testing procedure.——

~ See Ship Structure Committee Report,

-..“,,,

Serial No. SSC-33, Nov. 15, 1949.

.,.,,

.

3s

‘Evalii&tion”of-tests fbr ratingsteelsi” : -“ ~ ~~

Studies ‘witkstandard and modified Ktizel-t~especimu~~s~’

Crack initiation and propagation studies.of Klnzel-type -“

specimens. .,

Crack-sansiti+~ty tests and tee-joint tests of .41EClas~es

B and G steel. ,. .,

,.,,

EVIIJTATIONOF TESTS FOR uTING smx ,,———.

,’ ,,A survey was made of the’published literature and-unpublished

.... . ..,,reports to uncover the various kinds of test sfiecimensthat had already,,.,J,.,+ ,!.been developed’t~’s&dy properties of meld joints in s~eel and;’tkeweld-,, .,.,.,.,..... . ,, ,- .,al&litY of stee~s, ahd ‘to‘dete-e thei’rappjica%ility to the ‘current+;

——*-SeeShip Structure Committee Repor’b”%erialNo. SfiC-33,Nov. 15, 19~9.

,.,- i’ -

invesl$gation...,Inchoosing a.test.foren~~ttig{tie, effect of welding

on medium-carban,hull steels .aud.predicting:.thebeha~our of the welded,,

struc5ure under ssrvice Zo@ds,.a number gf.factqrs ha$ to be considered..,

The speeiman employed in this test should be smll, .,econamimil$-amd:

conducive ta easy,.aqdrapid testing.,..The.~~uence of:mapufactqring@

fabrication vsriafiles,such as variations,in steel analysis -d process-,,.

ing,,welding prgcedyres, electrodes pr~hgating~ postmat~~~,?te.$. m~t

.alsa be reflect@. by the response of thspecimen during l@sting. The.,

serylge con~tions of a weldment, such as rigidity, loading, and tempera-

ttie variations, should also be simulated by constraint developed by the

geo~et~,of the specimen, rate of loadtig~and testing the EP?CiMenS at

different temperature lewls. Ther@o~e, tha only +ests-conside~ed

during this survey for further study were those @wl@qh the test specimens

contsined the components of a weldments that fsJ weld me~l~ heat-affected

metal caused by welding, and base metal..

The types of tests mere roug~y di~ded into the follawing ‘Ive

grol.lpsn‘

1.

2*

3*

4..

5*

Bend tests

Tension tests

Rapid-1oading or @?acttesta

Cracking or restraint-t~e tests.,

Fatigue tests,,

The tests of Group 4$the cracking or

excluded from further consideration, because,

restr~nt-type test, were.“

in general~,they were used,.

.. .

..

-5-

‘‘fa”rdkterml~tig the “s&c@tibl~Zty of a steel to cracking d~ing oi”afte~7,.‘,,>.,. ,..~

wd~img and not for p~edicting’the performance df a welded structtre~,.

The”fatigue tests of Group 5 were also excluded becau~e they did not,. ,-,.. ....,+ ... .,.

appea; applicable to t~~efnveatigationt TMle fatigue might playa part

ii iioine

type of

,.aspects

.,. ,:, ,: “. .,....,

ship faj.~uTeSjIt was held to be subardiuate to’the s~dden &ttle

.,.,

The impact types of tests in Group 3 wer~ considered for various,.

of”the investlgationj such as studying the transithw+anperature,, ,,

rimge bf weld metal and selected heat zanes. However, because of the.,,, , ,.

ext6hsive notched-bar tests made by ’investigatorsengaged in other phases.. , ,.

“of“thisresearch program, thi~ tjpe of test was not included.

To further’classify the bend and-tension tests, they were sepa-.-. , ,,,,,4

rated ititotwo types$ those using notched and unnotched test specimens..,

The bend tests using specimexiswithout a machined notch or stress raiser,,,

included such teste as the guided bend, free bend, and single and double.,. “..4.”’,.,,, ,’.

tee-joint bend..’: .,’,, .,.

Of theses the alngle-tee-jointbend test ~iasconsidered satis-,.,, *,.

factory for this investigation because the test specimen was judged most,“

,.,..,,. ‘. ,“.’;,.,representative of a typical welded structure found in ship construction,

,.,..

‘and because.other investigators had found that the test was practtcal for,-! ;. ..,,

rat”ingthe welding quality of steels-,-. !,,’,;

.. The bend specim.ensycontaining machined notches of various types.- ,,’,,:,,,‘ / .,.!,to impart a higher degree of const~aint to the specimens, had been used

,- ,L-‘. .. .>,- ,~ .,.-

.- extensively by othe~ investigator’ for ‘evaluat~g the relative prop~rti~s..,. .,,, ,..” .. . ,..

“ofvar”ious#te61s tobe used for s~me spec’ifictype of wel~m~nt: The type,’1.,.,. ,>.,,. .

of specimen having a longitudinal-weldbead an~ trans%rse notch across the

-6-

specimen and the ~pecimen

seemed to he most in line.. .. ,,, ,,

having a transverse bead aridtram,sversenotch

@th thp,sta~q.dobjective of th@ research..~. “..!.!: -: -[.- -..,., - ,, ,.. , .’...,,

Unnotched tension spec-hens were,g.ivenlittie cousiderat;~.~::!7.;.:’,,.,.,, >.i<..,,.,,. ... .. . ,,,. .,., ,,. ,.,,..’!,,.,ki’ ,;’,.4’ .,: ‘.. ...

“b~causemost ,pfthese tests y~ereused,o~y+.for evaluating weld-v~t~l,$,trerlgbh.,~.”’- ,., ,.!.,.-,,,,1,..,..,,., ,,.<‘ ‘..” -‘,,;.’. .... .- ,:,”.:.... ! :“’”.’

efficiency= Hcnmve:$,one no~shed ~ensjon sp~ci~en wasused. to a limited:;.,~g,; .. ,),:,.. ,..$ .’~.;,”’.:::,,: .:,+,,_.:, .,:,..:.,...,,extent in.the project.,. ,,~,l,,.,.,, ,,,. ,, !: ~-,i,,,. .:.-.

On Octnher 1, 1947$the various types of tests reviewed by th~..., ..<.’,.. .,

literat~e~s~yey we~e discusced with the SR-1OO Project Adwi@ory Committees....,“: ,,,4 .’,:,.L:,.”‘,’”.‘-:.,” .,,,- ... ....... ,.:...,,,...;.,..., ,,,- ....... .. .It was deci~qd at this meetigg thatz (~) specimens having .alongitudinal.. ,.>,,: .; .. ,,,.U,,,,.J:,,.,,,,.’...,’+.,.... .,.,1 ..: :,.“.,“::,

weld bead and transveme notchj (2) specirnerwkatig a tr~nsv~r:e b:ad,,., ,,. .....”. .,.’.

and transverse notcil; and (3) tkq tees$ond test, rep~.essntinga typ~:al., .,,,4.,:.,.. ..; ...’..,,,,. --,..:. ,.. ,., ...:welded ship joint, should b~,,m~her invest,igatadover a range of testing.,,‘ ..! ...,: . . . .temperatures to evaluate the strengrh, ductility, types of fractures, and.,,..:, -, :L., , .,transition+emperature ranges of the !V3riland ‘i~liship steels. It was.,.‘,’!.“:: .’ ,.

..the thought of the committee that, if one of these tests were to give the

,.,h: .,,;.... .,same transition~temperatwe ranges for ‘lErI1and IICrlsteels that the hatch.-

,- l:’.;. .“ ,-. ;; ..corner did with these steels, then that test would be wort~~ of further

study as a possible acceptance test of a steel,fo~,,shipplate, The,., ,,..” .

compositions of project steels are given in Table B-2, Appendti B.,. ,’> . ..“. -.:The specific specimens included were the tee-bend$ the Kinzel-

..’ ~ , ,.-’,.,...,

type, Lehigh-type, Naval Research Laboratmy high-cqnstra+nt?Jackson-type,., ,.

and notched tension specimens. The specimen designs are given in.“

Appendix A, Figures A-1 through A-9~ The welding schedules are given:-.-.,,,, ,,... . .

,,$nAppendix B, Table B-l. Each of the specimens,,J,,.- ‘[.’,

in,,thefallowing sections except the Kinzel-type.:,., .,

in a separate section of this report-,,. .“ ,.”.,”

.’. ,. ,. ,.::.’-.,,,. ~“j , ,:.J .:’“

.—

mill be discussed ,b~iefly,.

specimen$ wl@h is discussed

“.

—

....

.

.-’z-

The studies wem made with Project steels ‘t%~l,@dl~CtIBecause...

--.,

,, .,. .,,,,, ... , ,.,.’ :{. .,

they previously exhibited a widely d~+ferent...,,,),.”-> ,,. ..

hatch-corner~ and other tests. Class E6010~.-.. !.,. ;.,,,,.,. .! ,,

electrodes were used to make the samples for.,.,,,,... .... .. .,,

,. , ..:“.-..7, ,’.specimefiswere tested at various temperature

. ....,.,,+- .!.,.,,.. , ,.,!.,. .. ...

be~~or in the full-sqq2e..,.. .,’.,” ,, ,,

5/32- and 3/16~=inoh=-diameter,“ 4,’

the initial tests.) The,,,,,,, ..

levels todeterm@tlle,,.”,.

tra”~sit~.on-tsmp~ratlmeranges for the steels. The transition-temperatm’e.,. ..:,,.“ ,,,

ranges mere detwmined by the following criteria: absorbed energy$ lmnd,,-. ~,.,,.,-..,,. ,. . -,,’.. ‘.,,,.,..

anglej lateral contraction and fracture appearance. Of theseY only data.i. ,,.,.,-,, ..

on absorbed energy will be p~esonted fi.this report to Consem spaced,.”.. .....

since it has prowd to be the most usetul ~f the crite,rialisted above~., .

,..’ “,.:,,

,.. Tdsts With TQe-Bend S~imen ‘ -.’ “ ‘“””-

.,. .. .. .....,- . ..

The main advantage of’the tee-bend test is that it represen@!,,-,, ,.. .’.$.,-

a typical welded joint used in ship building and structural vr+~ing~,... -!,.,.?-. ,.- . . .,,. ,,: ,..’

The s~ecimens are easily-machined and tested. The most appa+e~t,di~ad-,..’., :,-.’.., .,, ...

,,

vantage of t~s test is the,.

... re@rements and the amount

Details of the specimen’”i%re

~.,,. ,’” .

difficulty in adhering to the.weld,<ng .,.,,. J... ., .. .,. ... .i

of discard of specimen lost after mackining.

showb’in’Appe~dix A* Figures A-1 and A-23

The standard tee-bend specimen was used to stu~y ‘~Brrfand llC1f.. ,....,. ,,“.,... .,

steels. Curves for absorbed energy vs. temperature for this test ar,e..,.,:,.. ‘,,- .....’

shown in Figure 1* For both steels> the transition-temperaturerange,g.. ...,.,, ,- ,., ,....,,. ...,”. .,. .

were lower than those for the l~atch-cornertests for’the respectim,t.; .. ..!,. !,”,,.,.,.;,.- ‘.,: . ,,

st;els. Therefore, modifications of the tee-bend specimen were made in,,,, ,,.,’.,:.’,,.+.:. .,.,..an ’atternpt’tomatch the hatch-corner results,

.,,, ,,,. .,, .,,.;,,.‘..’>,-.’ .,--,

* DeGarmo, Paul E., l~T~si~’;Of’Viiio~S~”;esignsof Welded Hatch Corper for,,$&pS~l$:Weldti~.J@}mnalY Vol:;,27;,Febr_~.1948~..pp, ‘5%-58s; als~

“ Ship St~ucture Committee Report Serial No. SLC-~, ~ct. 23, 19L6., .,.. .. .: , ...,., L,-.

-e-

The first rnodifioatimnmade-in the tee-bend test was in the

weldimg procedure umd to make the specimens. A 3flA6-inch-dLmeter,, ,,, , .,>:.:.., .,,.,,,,,.\,,. ,,, ,,.!,’ ,.. ,’..,J,J

electrode was used instead of a ~/s2-iuch.diameier!,. .

e~ec-trade,and a..

,“ -,,”.:: ,“ .,,, :.,,,welding schsdule was set up to deposit a #16.~nch ~“illet’’w~t-h”s~i~htly.>,.,7,.,,,-.........<,, ,1!-,,, ,,. ,.,,’. . ,,, .... .. :,,.,..,,.”.:,’

less heat input psr inch of we~d than with the smaller ~~~c~~iode~ It W~S,:~’,...“,, ,..,.,~,,~.,., .. .,:,,.,, .“..,,,.,.,.

expected that this chango in welding procedure wo~d influence the’”’tra&->.‘,’,, ,..” ., ,+., ..-.”.,,-....

ition=+mperatmre ~anges of’the steels being tested~..,,.,,

However, tests showed,.\:..,.,..,-1,.,,,,. ,,, ,,.,!.,, .-,,,’ .’.:““”‘that tha ehang~ in wel&g sched~~e had”o~y a minqr influ~nee’”o~,:tra~si-

,,,,,.,.,,. -,.,.: “: ‘, ., :,.. .’?,“<..:...::.’~i.,=’~,.::,..-,;’ -, !-tian range, as shown in Figure 1.

As the dcwired increase.. .

,’ . !“

not attained, it was d~cided ~o.’ ,.’ ,:

tee-bend weldments for tee-he~d

,, ,.,., .. .. .. ,-. .. i,..,. :,..,. ..,.in trmsition-temperattia range “wis’”’‘.,. ,-,.,;.,. ‘.,,,..’.,: ~, 1,US6 the modified welding schedule &

.,, . .,!,, .,>,.specimens of different widths. The’

standard l-7/g-inch width was ,$ymaq:eil,to,>.inch.es. The tests of the.,,. ,.,

wider specimens indicated a slight increase in the tra~sitiionranges~.* , .... ,;.:, ,it,. , ,,

with the ‘Wn steel.being affected more than the llB~ steels, as shown..,.:,;:.,,.,,.,~,,,, !..,..l,‘.,’)., .....”.’...

by Figure 1. No further modifications were studied,.;,::....,,r,,.,.:;;:,;,,:,,.,+ ~,‘. ‘!--.“

...”$.,.,,.,,”,.TestswitJnLehz “Rh..T~e~~~cimen.—m

., ,’,., ,,

““Designd&ils ~f the Leh~gh-t~~”specirne~hre shown &A@n->,

Wu,steals obtained,’

The Lehigh “specimen

tietwo steels, but.-

by the hatch%orrmr,,.,, .,.

,,. ,,,L, ‘,, .,;, .,.

with the Iiehig~~ty@ specimen.sareshown b. Figure 2EL.

*est. Howem”rl no f~herwork was dme dth it.,because slightly batter,1,w>l,”,.)..,.1..,,

results were obtained with the Kinzel-t~e.~s’~ekimen.~vMchwas’similar In

‘:~’.‘,:/’,,, ‘$,: “..‘,: ,.,.!$, .,,,.

4,‘, .. ..,,,..., “’”,’>,”,(,),,..:!.),.. ....-!

-....,.

-..

. -9-

.-.

many respects to the Leh$gh speoimeu,,, ...’,,..,., ,“ :.,,,

T@m W~th-l&%~earc~ ~~.b~.~torySnecimn .,.,,,:%. ,.,,’!:,.,. . .’,,,‘,

ThO specfien designed by-the Naval Resea~ch Labo~atory is shown

,,!.’., >,,,

‘that there was “not’enoughdifference between the upper and lower Iitits of,., ,,

J,i %he-’ctiv;to Mke the test very sensitive for an accurate rating of steels.

.,,. ‘~herefore, no

,,,gave’’”sornewtia{

J! ,.,.

The

,,>, ‘,,.-.,.

further work was done with this specimen, since other tests,., .. , “ ‘,.

better performance. ,,., ..,,,, .’ ,.,,,<, i.Tests With Jackson.Tvpe SDacimen-—,—. ,.

Jackson-type specimens, having a transverse weld bead with a.,

,. ,..,machine~ ~otch~ as sh&n in Figure A-5 of Appendix Ay were made ,to,ch~ck the).,..’,..’ ,,-,,,effect of side’’notch& on the transition-temperaturerange. Consequeqt+y,,“.,:.,“;,,,.

tests.were only made on Wrl~ steels Data are shown in Figure 2b. JTofurther,,,,,; ,,.

,, ,,r,..~testing was done’tiikhthi’s’,spec,i@n,since i%appeared to have no advantage

,rover.o~hel:,bead-on@ate specimens.such as {lieLehigh a’ndK’in!zelwhich were,-----

easier to prepare. ,, ,:t- .,,!“...,,,

., ,.Tests Usinp Notched”Tension %ecimeti”,,,

Tension specimens ranging in width from 3 to 72 inches, and over,

had b?en,used.~investigators to determine the:tr~nsiiion ra~ges of various ~

ship,steels. It was believed .tha,t’thetension test ’w~smore representative of

the condition of loading fo.upd.in.a,.shlp~slnill,..- ..”.

sho.r.t-sp~.notched-bend+pe tests., Thereforei,..,. ,!..

<tiqn=.temp,~~at.y~,,~angesof,welded and nuwelded

o~:btch” corner than were the

. .. .i% was decided “thatthe trans-

wB:~“.and~!cllsteel ~hotid ber

determined by using notched teppion,specimenssirni%cb:ibdesign *O those used

for the bend tests, and the results compared with the bend-test results and

the hatch-corner tsst results.

-1o-,,, .

The notched-tension speeiti~~s-’’fis~$”k~;~f;”t~e~esame”’”~esign”%,.

-!,the Kfize?~-t~&.:sp%cii8bdj’.exC@p~ %hat the”~~id~hwas &&ed tO 2-3/4 inches

,.

to accommodat& the’te~t&g’eqtiiptient“-&d to p&&”nt:t~e possibility of failure

away from the notched’seition.,..,.

lld~pt~~bars were ‘~eldbdto””th;&ds of the

speeitkns to save

Results’

?. ‘&t&e mn& were

lower than the

same; in other

*lBrtlsteel.

,:(, l..,,,,,,.~

the project s~eey’. IUefetito Fig~es” A~6’&nd””A~7,Append&A.,,.,,..,,., ... . . -

d~’this test are shown in Fig&e 2:= The trane.ition+emper~,, ,.,.

lower’ti~~~sh&n b~”the other types of specime& studied and,.

,.IIatch’ctirnarresults. 150weverjthe qualitative orcierwas the

. .wcrds, the tests always rated lfC1t“steelas being inferior to

.,”’ ,.,,... ,.

,.,,. ‘ The rniiindis~.dvantageof tle riotched%msion tes~’~wm the low

temperatmies requ,i~edto obtain the transition-temperaturedata for the,...,.. ,-.

,.

5tee3s tested. ‘. ,.,..,....“,.’...

..,.Discussion ~f~,gsults from Evaluation’

.“..;,,

.——.- PStudTea on Tect Snec.— ,-,,., ....... ,,‘..,

With all test specimens, the ltCilsteel had a .higher..t~ans5.f@-.-

tempratura range than the WBrllsteel. This observation co~~el,atqd,d$Xec-

tly with

steels~..

obtained.,

results from full-gcale hatch-corner,testsmade on these two.,,. ..., ‘1 ..P ,,:.,:....... ,’,..,.-.,.,, .->,.

,.,..,!. ..’ -’-

Of the specimens studied, the transition-temperatureranges-.~... ...”

from the Kinzel specime,n,forIt~’t and ‘W’tsteels were a little..,.

closer to those obtained by the hatch-earner specimens than the transition-,..!

temperature ran~es ~bta,inedby other specimens.,,For this reaqon,~and. . !, ,

because the Kinzel speciqen waseasy to weld, nachiqe.,and testP,)itwas.,’! ,,.’

selected for further qmtudiss,,andevaluation. ?,(,. :.,.” ,,., .“.,, ..’,l.~f.!~,’ .7

.-..i(~, ., ., ,:.~,-,.,, . ..

—..-

— -. .- .—

-11-.,!

,.., ,., .

.1, ,,.’ ;.. ,.~,,~~,’ ,, ,

..S7JJDIFS.:J?ITHST.4.NDJWIAYtOMODIF~D_~ll’UEL-TIZPE,5PECIMEN5.... ..,,,, ,. ,.,..., .. . .. ,-, . ., ,.

.1,

“%e”i~ei”atti”e’:~+an”g~g’f& the steels studiia at tempkrai~~es &o’tto~:diffi.cult,,,

,’.‘“tb”obtainin t&ting. ‘Thewelding’on th~ specimeh wasdon~ a%’’”cnme~tsand

t~a~el speb’dswhich are nimmally wed with’’~/l6-ZnchE&blOel&t~{od&s:”in

.,, ,? ’”., .,’.”.. ,,. .....actual welding on large structlrres.When the specimen-was notched; about

..half’of”the weld metal was left unde~’tbe root of the notch. Fdr tfi~se

reasons, I’t’wasbeliaved tii~tthi~ specimen was mare represeiiative of act~til

,.welds than’’someof the tithefispecimens stbdied~ The sp&cimen ’detdils’are

,. Therefore, this speci~en was select~d for &e iti’fhther ‘studies

of “othersteels. “Jariousmadiyication~ of the specimen were made in’an,.

attempt to more closely match the transition~temperatureof %he’hatcli-corner

specimens and study factors contrillutingto th,eperformance of w=lded labora-

tory s~ec%me~s.!, ,,

Evaluatio~of Froject Steels,,.,,.,., — --(=.-.

The “originalwork with’the Kinzel-type specimen was’to rate’

“JrBrrt& llC1rproject steels, along ‘~~ththe other type specim’ehspreviously

dzscussed. At the December’,194$,‘meetingof the Projeci”AdvisoryCommittee,.,

it ~as deeided”that ‘tA1ltin”dlrl@l’’steelsals”obe studied wlth”the’Kinzel-tme

spec~men to compare &t”h the’~imil.ts”obtai~ed for’trBriratid’lrCfl’”ste-els=,.

. . . . A we~ded:aridan umwelded’series of ebeh of ’’the’~~oject’steels’.. :..,.,.,.

-12-

data for these test~ were plotted, and are shown in .

notch, and 72-inch center-notched plate spe.cimanq~ $,he:K@zel

rated the steels in the sape gene~al nrderas.~ther welded and

spe@,mens*, : ,.

,.,-,,.,,. ,,. ,..Variations from Skandard K@zel.Tvne Snecirnens

.!.’, ..-, ,.-

Various modifications of the Kinzel-type specimen wre

in attempts to find conditions by which transition-temperature..,. ?

spec~rnen

umelded

used

ranges

obtain@d from the hatch-corner tests could ‘~e’”rnoreclmely duplicated

with this type of test specimen,and to,obtati:more:$u~orwt~,mgud-

ing the factors which influencedthe p,er@rmance,ofthe specimenm The

modificatio~s used included meof:,E6040;;:qlqqtTgdesinsteadof E601Q,,

a change@om 3-inq&wide specime~p tQi,l+l~2,and&inch-w$d@,~pecimens~

a ,charigqin”@ch Ldqpthfrom 0.050 in~,h,toG@90 Inch.deepy and;the:us~

‘, ,“. ,-l ,. .,, ,,-

...~..~.!.’.,. “, ,:-’.,. ,,,,,,,,, L..,:. ...’ .f,I‘..’

..

‘, -“13-

,.. “..., ,.,

,: . ..‘....’,,> ,“of variou~ thermal treatments. These will be “discussedin turn. ,..

*Z.,, ‘. ,:..,..:,...- ,.“!-,..:.,.,,.,,.,

Influe~ce of E6020,Electrodes on,Trensitioa ,Ranp,e ,-——— $ —.A’-.— —

.-A series of.llinzel-typespecimens was made”using.E~02C electrodes... .

to determine if the transition rango would be changed from that,obtained,,.; :,>........:(,. ,,..,,.:.,.,.-.+,, !..; .’:>

when.E6010 e~ectrodes were used. ~he’heat’inp”~tper inch of d:po~ited,.,,. .,,’,; . . ,.,,,..

wel~:’~etal~~as””~tide’as~e~ly as gossi’blethe same for specimens weldpd,,,..:,,,,.:. ..;!.!,. ...“ !‘.,.

,,,.,with’t%e “twotypes or e“l”ectrodes~This variable was controlled ?s,c}oS,elY....; !,.,.,,> .’,,as:po~sible ‘sothat any’’changesresulting in iran~i%iou-temp.~ra,$merange

~,,,,..’.,,,,.could be attributed to d~.fferencesin type ~f weld metal.

..,. ,,’Akworbed=energy data for these tests are shown in’Figtie 4.

,. .,-*‘-i. “,:

As can be noted, th~’change in electrodes had little effect on the

~,transition temperature range, although theaergj values were not so high

,“’4,.as those of-the specimens-weldedwith E6010 electrodes. Tests wqre not made

h!..?

with ltC1tsteel be~ause ‘oithe small influence of E6020 weld metal on,t~~.,,

transition range of llBr‘isteel, and because of a shortage of,t~CITsteel.

Influence of~cinen Width on Transition-Temneratwre%nse——, .———.!.,,,

Two series of modified Kinzel-type specimens were prepared and

tested ,todete?mine the Influence of variations

transition-temperaturerange. The specimens of.,,,

inches wide and the others were 6 inches wide.

the l-1/2-inchHwide specimens of ~lBr~Isteel are.-

in specimen wid.tlaon

o;e sertes viere 1-1/2

A’@sorbed~energy’data for

.. .shown in F@re 4. The

decrease in width lowered the transition range slightly.il%r the 6-inch-,,.”

wide specimens, the.trans,itionrange was the same> but erier~ values were>“,4.

. .“ .-u-

in Figure 4*), lTotests were made on “CIIsteel with .mocli:fic.~,tions,in ?@dth..:,.,..:. J., .,.,.’...:.::,“.,,..,. ,,. ..,:;, .,-,. ~,1,,,,,.’,~, ., ,’,. ..,,

of specimen4 ~,

.,, . .. .. ,! .:~,’.>+,

‘. . ; ,,...,.,.,

,. .,. , ,. .:..,: , ,.i)..).

~lg+ce,of Notch De th on Trans~on-Te erat~e Ran es,.—!*-+=-”- : .:.., y, ..:,,:,. E : :;”.,:j\::,.:.:;::,-, ., ,7.

into heat-affected zones at t.he,bott~.mofth4’’weld~ Madrosections af .,.

both steels were slightly raised. . ~,.:,.“.. ,.’;,.. .. ....,.,~ .’,. .,.,.,”..., ,“. ,

The effect of several thermal treatments on the behavior of

Kinzel-type specimens of ‘lBrlland ~lCJistaels was studied to determine

if the performance of the specimen wm.dd be improved in the same manner,.

that hatch-coiner performance was improved by stress-relievingtreatments-

The thermal treatm~nts included:...,.

a. The use of 10F, 70F, 150F, 250FY 400F, and 500F preheats

,.-

.,.,-.

. .,“ :

~’b..The -ise.of70Fpreheat”and a posthea% ’ofl150F for cnehow an lFBrtiand “Ctlsteels-,. ,, . .:,,

.,

c,. The use of 400F preheat and a pqstheat of ll,5QF.,,fo~-one,..!‘. /...,,hoti’oti~lBrlIsi+eli .“”’ .“..

.,.surveys were made to ~eter~ine the effects’’’of~hehe%wribus:;t%rmal treat-

,, ,’ ,-. ,,,......,,-..,.,,,:..,,.‘meritsQ“nboth st,eels;“ “ ““’‘“” ‘““ ‘ “’”‘“’‘ ,.-’

., ,! , ! ,.-. ,, ,.

. :, . . “,...

“.Effe_~e@@~~d Pos,theaton ‘W(rl.Steel~,Axs,orbed~energy.,,’-

data for ~r~riisteel Kinzel-t.ypespecimens given various,preheatsaxe ,,, .,,..

shQwn ,in,Figuxe 7. A meheat Pf 10F had p~ effect on th~ trpnsition-.,.’.,”’,.,.*

temperature~-rangeq:,,tl~il,ateel. Preheats of l@.F,,,~50~~.4001?,~~~5Q,0F~,., . .

successively lowered..thetransition range, b@ were..withipthe range,of,! :,,..,

values shown fcm 4001?preheat in Figure.7: Spec5meps welded wi,th,preppats..’ ,,, ,,.

of 70.~and 400FY and po~thea,~d,for one hour at ll,50F~gave ~imilar values.

The transition rangeswere.not lowered h@ow that of the l@OlVpr~heat3’but... ,.

the absorbed-energy valtieswere higher. In general? these tke.rrna~,trept-.,!., :,.

aent$ improved the pqrforqance,of the specimen in the same ma~e~ that,-.

stress-relteving treatqe.ntsimpr?ved hate.h=-co~erperfo~mance~ .,

,’ ,Effects,of.Preheats.,andPosthgat on llC1iSteel. Based an a~sorbed,, ,. ,,

energy,,lOF.and 150F preheats had

ture range oftWii steei$ although

Preheats Of 250F, 4GGF, and 500F,

little effect on :~he,trans$ti~n.tempera-...’

absorbed-energy values were lower..,, ,,“.

however,,succespiyely low~red,the,

transition range, with the 5QOF preheat being the most Sffecii,ve. A.bsorhed-.,., ,,, .,

,,en~rgy data for 10FI,70F, 500F preheats, and 70F pr.eh~ata?d 1+50F pgst-,, ..,,

..-:6-

.:...:, .,,,,.,>’J.-.”.’“’..., ,’heat on ‘tCttsteel are shown fn Figure 6. The posthe~t treatment did not

,.~..,-l,., .. .. .-..:.>., ,“,“J:“>’.”,’~..lower ~h~ transition ~ange belqw,tmt’~f:5~OF”pTelleaty bu~,the maximum

ahs~r.bed.:~pekgy’mas$ncreasad,abo~t:~~.,,i,nc,h.po@s~ve~th~$ obtained... : .,r.,.! ,-’..

with 500F preheat$ as shown by Figure 6*.,...,..:,,.. ,,:-,<’,,, ,’. ‘-,,.’!,:)l..;.”;>“..,.,.,-.’,, ~,.r..,,.,.,...}.,:,.,,,, ..,::, ,.,..:‘,

The cooling rates for each preheat ~er~ measm”ed by’’rneanb’o~’...-. ,:-::4.::,:.-..:..:,., .,..+. ,,,,..... ,.~.,,,..,,..,. .‘,”, ,.: i,,, J ,. ; ,: ,-..~, .-, ,- ‘i.-,’ .n” I’ ‘.7;, ,,

a C;nnuel~A~wel””’t~lerrnocoup3eflash ~lded into a small hole drilled in.:”:,!...,,.,.:~,:,

the bottom side of the spacimen.,..,

.4veragecooling curces for the %ious

Figm”e ,8. An e~mlnation-..efthesnoqlingng curves,, ,....,,,“.,,. . ..

coolingchanged with+prehpati,,Fora preheat of

was m~~h faStST ~han the ,ratefor500F preheat, ~

,:tn ssy”,secoqds?,c?~ling times the e~q.~empe~a~~e? fOT ~OF~ 70F3 15°F$

‘25QF.y,.@OF$and;500F preheats were 35QF;+~45?F}.5QOFS55QF9 7~OFy and 80~F~

4..respeetively~“illustratingthe effect of preheat in slowing the cooling rate-

Hardness,surveys,using a Viokera hardness.tester, were made”.on

samples of ‘Brtl:and ‘ICI?steels welded at the various preh~ats and postheats~

In general, as the preheating temperature was increased, the hartiess mas

decreased in both the meld,and the heat-affected zones of ‘]Br~land ‘lCtt

steels. The postheat tirsatmentfurth~~ decreased hardness in both steels.

This decrease in harii~e~+ap~ears to,correlate with the lowering of the

.,,,transition r~ges,wi~h increased preheat temperature. However> there

may have been other changes in the weld,metal and heat-affected zone which

accompanied the preheating which was responsible for the lowerimg of the

,,., $ransiti~n .rangesof the specimens. For example> the the~ma~-treatments

may havq permittad hydrogen to escape’,fromthe weld meta~andheq~~~ffected

..

.. .,

. . .,

-.ly-,

-.,.

..-

,-..

.-.

,. , .,.. CRACK I~~_QQll ANiIIl@GATIOllST~IW OF.~——.. KSN2EL-=TYPESPXCIMENS.—.— —- :—--~— .,

“,

,. .,!. .!!,,,

Ah this point, the work on interp-ion of the”testresflts ‘

of the KinzeJ--typespecimens was started.%-This consisted of precise.,:’:.,,

determinationsof the initiation of the fracture and its p~agatiwl through

,,.,the C?OSS section. , ?“,,

Welded and unwelded Kirczel+pe specimens rieieprepared accord-“,,

ing to star+dardprocedure.‘!,!”-.

for ‘Brl’steel sp~cimens,.{..,, ,.,...

Test temperatures selected wer’e’80Fand CJ~

and,180F.,,and40F fdr.W1t‘steel sp’ecitiend:Two

or,,:hree,specimens were bent at each of several deflections ranging from

0005 to O*250rtich,at @.dspan for welded specitiens,ahd froti’0i05tol.25,“

inch for urmlded specimens. Follo~tingdeformations all sPecim@ns w@re

cut and sectioned ,transverseto the notch; afiddepth’of cracks was“, ,“,, .,.measured. In wel~ed.specimens, cracks were ~.dentifiedby the zone in

the notch rad in which they originated,. In urm~eldedspecimens, cra,cks

were ident~fied by locationy as center or edge sections. Average crack-.,.,,

depth data were tabulated and plotted against deflection. Figure 9,., ,: ,1

summarizes’’thecrick-depth data for these series of spbcimens..’ !.,

‘,,.!,!.:,Crack Initiation , ~ L J. ‘ ‘ : ““-’ “

,,

.. .-.,,!,’.,,

AtO.b50-inch deflection at’~dspan of ~lBrttand ~~Crtsteel,,.,1 .,’.,,.

‘.,sp@6irnem~kth Welded and unwelded, small Surface’tearswere-observed”

+~bees~p Structure C~ Report Serial Nom SfiC-LO,October 1> 1951*

-1$-

specimens, these tears were observed in all zcnes, tlnatis, meld metal~.,,,, ,,.,.,.,

heat-affected zdn~, and in base met&’’Thdti6 were no sib@ficant dif-. . . .

ferencesjnthe tears observed in specimans tested above and below the

! , 4“- .,..,transitiab rangew

,.’.’ .,.,

,,. ,“ .,,,!... . ,,

.Grack ?$onagakion, .. ... ,-,.,..,. ,., ‘.,,+,,

,.. . ,,,., ,, ,,.As the deflection at midspan of the Klnzel-type specimens was

..... . ..

.,,.,. ~,. ... ..,.,

increased beyond 0.050 inch, one of the several’-discontinuou~”’cracksor,-

~. ,.., ,,. ,..,..:.

*ears that were present at 0.050 Inch increased’’in’depth~’orp~opagated,,.,... ,,

The increas~’in propagation occurred at different deflection. An arbi-.... ~,,,

trary depth of 0.C05 inch was chosen’to define a crack: The deflections. . :: . . ,, . .

at which cracks had attained a depth of 6.0005inch were measured, as,. .”,,’,,:--- .. . :,,, ,...,.-

fOllows:., .,,,.:, ,., ”‘,4,., ... .,.!.....,.

&oF, .,.. .

0.06 ‘ ;

,.., O*55 ;..

$~a.cksstarted~o;:,‘.

propagate beyond 0~005 inch depth in the welded specimens a@ost immediately,,.,+- . ,,.

while the unwelded specimens underwent considerable d~fletit~on”’tiefo~e’-’”””””

cracks p~gpagated.Jtwas.alsp obseryed t@tthe, !’C:’!.s~qel,crackedat

lower..de:lec~~ons:t~+he:’~?rlfandthatt emperaturq:,dl$?fe~nc~~ appear@

., ~,. ...+... . . ............,, .... i“, ..: ,.’ ., .’!. .,

, . ...-...: -.. .:,. , , ,,.’ , ,“,

..

,.

,-

-,

.....

-19-

-,

.. .

::

,.,-.,

,...,’ ,-

to have very little e~fect on when cra~ks started to propagate

To demonstrate how cracks ~ropagated> isometric gr~phs were,.

. ...; ,,prepared, SS shown in Figures 10 and 11 for welded and’unwelded’iJC1lsteel’

,. ,- .“ . ...

at180F. These figures demGfistratethe early fractuie’of the ‘weldaxea’of,..,

the welded specimens> as compared with the unwelded specimetis~”.They a,re,’.”. -,

,,+typical of,all the curves ‘obtainedfrom weldad and unwelded ‘]Brl]’and WII

steels tested at the temperatures shown above..,. ,,

ht.e~~ets.tion of the Behavior of Ki~zel-e Snecimens~. —:--, — .—t -— -—

The crack-props.gationdata explained the infel-iority‘.

.,

,,or’w~lded”

Kinzel-type ‘specimenscompared with unwelded specimens. The!,., .,, .,

vs.-kemperature data,.

, which were used to study trans’ikioti’’’’ranges,were

bne~gy absorbed-

,,,originally obtained from the area under hhe load.def~ect~oti;’cbve$foi ‘

the test

Start”of

,. .,,., ,,, ,, .: .. . .specirnens,i~,-Bydividing the energy absorbed ~ thd’specimens,.... ., .,...,..

energy absorbed..beforecracking, and (b).energ~ absorbed sl%er,..

cracking, tt is posdble to quantitatil~ely,~eterrnipewhat has:. ,,,,

the ~eatest effect on energy’vahesg

‘In Figure 1.2~energy abeorbed to maximum Ioed,of Kinzel-@q

specimens of’% ~iand,qy steels is SFo~n* This energy is.divided into..

energy absorbed before and ,aftercmacking~ Figure 13 compares the

energies absorbed after erafl~ing~”If the energies absorbed pnlor to!.,,,.

cracking’fo; wel@ed specimens”versusunwelded specimens are compared at

any tempez;ature,,it is.lfoundthat ,the~~are large dif~erenbes bqtmeen.,”,

th~ two, and that the melded specimens absorb very,little,energy up to,:..

the rAart of cracking, If the energi~s after cracking are comparedj it

can be observed that the differencg~”b~tween-~h~welded and,umwelded.,.,, ,, .,.-. ... .

,., . .. . ,..,,!

-.

., ’,,.

-20-,,, ,.,.,.,.,,,.+ ‘-.,.

,..< ,:,..”. ;.,.”.‘,>,‘,’,,:..,.,,,“,’” “}”

specimens are much Ieqs than ~,~q,.d~ff,qr,e~lce$.in,eaerg$es.@fore;,.:...,,’.,,’::!,-.,. ...’. ..........,!,,,.,..,.

““.

cracking

the weld area,+n,,welid~dspectiqns contyiQ@e.d@ost @ the low energy ; .,....... ,,.. .. ..“. .. .. .

values of welded Kinqe~-type specimens, +,s...~pqrededto upwq.J~e,d.Kinz.el+.,,,.,,. .,.,,. ..... ,.,,.”.,,.‘. .;,, .,----.,-. .,

performance of Itin~el-&~e specjmenss this improvement probably resulted;,.,, ........,:, ,’

directly ~r~m improvements in w~d metal and the $@-aff.ected -zoneP,, .,...,1 ,.,,,.

,~he ipprOV~@.. in weld metal presumably pll.o~~ed:~qre:.#efol”mationbefore ‘;.,.’”:-,,..-.,,. .... ,., ..

the crack ,s$art,edand thus better perfo~gance was,obtq,ine~at ~owe.r~ ‘ .4.

., ,, L’, . ..l ,...:,~!4. ,. r r,,;,,”””,.“ ,. ~,......

,, .,f,,. ,,,.+, , ‘: . .,

At~ihe’ikkt of the”proj’ect,‘theo~y specifi~’da~~ available!.,. ..,”!,,.. ,

on the performance of large welded structures ~as that obtained from

testing full-scale welded hatch ~orners made of several ship steels at..,,

the U~versity of California.+ In the initial planning, it was desired..<,,

to determine <f a test’using a small welded specimen would give the same.,. .,

transitiori-t’emperat~e”ranges as those obtained by the full-sc~e hatch-

., .,,+.;. ,.‘,.’4-;;.,corner specimens o~:the same steels and electrodes. It was believed that

. . . ~ . . ..“

if such “a’testwere fodd the small welded specimen might be useful in,,, .

,, ,-, .:..,,, !’.. . . .,?,.+’;, ,..~,.‘t.~,>..predicting the performance of ’other steels of the same grade when used in

,.., ;.,:.?+,,,.~,+.!, ,,.:1..,:,. ,L,’!..,.,

larg”ewelded structures,,..,.....(..4)

,, ...-.,)!;,.,,,,,C, .:.!:;,!“,’”, .<,,,......:: “.”;’,..-,..

.,

,_-

---,.

-.-.

*see Ship Structwe committee Repoi+s Serial Nos. SSC-5, Oct..23> 1946 and

-> ‘Ug= 19s 1949 ●

--

-21-

The

perfd~man~e

1.

,.

2*

The

as follows:

1.

. . .

3.

,,. .

work done toward findinga,s~cimen for predicting the,,,. “ ,,..,’.” ,“-”.. ”’-;,. ,,,”. .“ ,.

of steels was as fo~ows~ ,:,,,,.,, ,,.

A’literature survey and study of many ~ests employingsmll specimens was made. On the basis of results fromthis ~uvey, five ~~11 ~e~d~d.bend specimens @ oqe

tension speiimen were ’selectedfor furtker study todetermine if one or.m=e of them ~ofid sho~.the same ~~qualities in steels that were brought out by hatch-cornertests of the same steels- : ., .. ~~~~

Two steels, ‘*BpHand ‘lC1lSwere used.in.evaluation O$fivesejected bend

cifiefresults,,

zests and one tension test.

and conclusions from these studies are summarized

The transition-temperatureranges of “llBrlla~~ yl~~lsteelSp

as determined by the Kinzel sp~cimen~ ~atcked those obta~-edbythe.hatch-corner specimens. However! it wasconeludedfrom the over-all study that ‘.tis probably too much toexpect tha’tany one small welded specimen will ~iva thesame transition temperature for a series of’steels that wouldreobtained from a series of large “weldmentsof variousdesigns made from the same steels. ‘ ,.,.

Much more importantwas the fact that all of tie small testspecimens showed that llBru ~teel gave a better performance

at low temperatures than ~lcltsteelf the sane as was shown

by the hatch--cornerspecimens. This was true whether thespecimens contained welds or not. That is~ specimens ofmime plate showed the same trend in differences b~tmeen;IErl~d llC1~steels. T~s difference bet~~enfllBrl~qndlJC: steels has b~en shown by several other investigationsin which tests (Navy tear test, 72-inch-wide plqte, 3-inchedge-notched specitien,Gkmrpy i%aotched bar, Charpy keyhol~-noich?.dbar, etc.y of prime plate were used. ,:,-

It appears, then, that anyone Of several sp~cimeqs (We:dedof pr~me plate) could be used to’compaie steels of thesegrades for we in large welded structures. Howeve.r,.i+.woul’dbe”’necessary+% correlate test resfits for’tinysteels of varying quality with service results of weldrnentsmade with the steels in order eventually to build up’baik-ground information for evaluating,,thetest resflts.

,, “~. . ..’,,

w Kahn, N+-%., llFurth~rstud~,of.,Navy.Tear TeStll~theand Xmbem’~ojE~A.J ...Welding Journa~g 29 (2)~ Research SUPP~O”PPO G4s tc’96~’(~95~)~

b. See ship Structure Committee Report Serial No. SSC-8j Jan. 17, 1947.c. See Ship Structure Committee Report Serial No* S~C-9~ ~V~arck19$ 1947’

“-22-.

..

4-J’~onQ of the welde~?test spec~:~en~’”:s~iowed-coti~~usi~-elythateither ‘Br’tor llC1lsteel was more weldable tba~ the other.Howeverl the welded specimens’alw~,ysgave poorer performancethan specimens of the.same t~e Of,Prime.@a@.. ,.4

.. ,,,..,,; ,,.. ! ,.

... ,,‘With the selection a$Mi~’Xinqelrntypp, sp~cirnenas’’t~~emost suitable

.“, ,. .:, .. .... ,,, - .,. .

welded sp~clmsn for,predict~~g the p~~,o~nce.of,s~~elsj the cr~ck behavior..-,.,,!,. ,<, ,,., ,..,,

of the specimens was studied to dete%dn:e:why”we~ded”Kinzel+pe specimens

. ....gav&poorer performance t~~unwelded spec~m~~S,.“~he results &fidconclu-

,.. ~, .,

sj.onswere as fo-llows:,:,~.,. .,,, ‘.

1. Results of the investigation ongation of cracks in Kinzel-typesteels showed that fractures in

‘,,,

,;,;J:!,,/.

the initiation and EYQP?S ..,:1,specimens of ‘lBrt’and ‘}Cf~these qpecimens Dronapated

first in.the we~d rntitialrnThe bell~~~”~f{he$e’~pdai~ens waS

‘controlledprimarily by:the cracking’of ~h~’’we~dmetal ata ver~-low’bend angl@ ‘as=t$e specimsns‘w6re“te$~ede

“,.- -,. 1.,..2~~Xt was concluded thdt,’although%he Kinzel+ype specimen

~could’beu~ed to rate stecils>mare work is indicated beforethe spe”cimencould be used as a weldatiilitytest- It isbelievsd the specimen could ti~used to study weld-metalproperties and~ with modifications, could also be used to

k . .,,..” : stti~ *lieeffects of the heat af weldikg’u’pcnsteels..’ ,. .,,:-.;;,“,, , , .“,,. ,,

CJtACK-SEN~ITIVITYTESTS AND TEE-JOINT‘, — —1.=-.-=’-1-.%-,.— v —..

,;, ,.’. . . TES;@OF, AFSCIAS.S,B AND C STEEL-,. ——.. ,, “<:,. !

,.~- ..-,

The final pha~e of work ‘onthi~ project was disttiict’andseparate,.

from the original objective of”finding a test-specimen suitable for rating‘..

steels~+$The objective of this phase of the investigationwas to determine,.>,.

the underbead crack sensitivity of,,forty~nneheats of s+eel.made to new,-

,. ,,. ..., ,..American,.~@sau of Shipping specifieahlons fo~ Class B’ahd C steel.

.,..,, ,-,

A second ‘obj~ctivewas to determ@b.,whether‘the~ore crack-sensitive,~..’, ,,

heats would”give trouble in service, ,asqqesured from cracking in large!., , ,... ,

*Ship ~tructure Committee.R~~o;rt~’SerialNo. SSC-Q, Oct~,l.>1951.m.,i,,...,,...J f;.,:, ..’

,,,~.,,. ’ ., .-:”-.,. .’ ..;. .’4 ,, .!..,.., ,..

,,

.,-

-.‘>

-,

The forty-one heats of”steel studied for crack s~nsititity

included one heat of AFS Peening Project+steel, eight heats of Class B

steei from David Taylor Modei Basin, thirty-two heats of Class B and C

steels directly from two steel mills. A control steel> designated as

Z-1-3,

known

was used throughout this :.nvestigation.The control steel was

to be c~ack sensitive

The standard %ttelle underbead cracking specimen was used in

determining crack sensitivity of t~~estedsti The undor”headcraclcingspeci-

men consisted of a Z-inch by 3-inch block, on which a weld bead was

deposited by automatic welding, according to the following schedule:

AW3 electrode classification E601OElectrode diameter, inch 1:8Amperes 96-100volts 2+26Travel speed, inches~minutesLength of bead$ inches 21/2Weld time? seconds 9

Following welding, speoimens were aged for 24 hours then stress

relietid to stop further underbead cracking. The specimens were sectioned

down the longitudinal centerline of the weld bead, polished, and transfers

made of Magnaflux i~idications. These indications were measured, and

recordedm Average per cent underbead crqcking ~as obtained from the ten

specf.mensused for each heat of steel,

Of the forty-one heats testedz aply three steels had values

of underbead cracking more than 7 per cent. These three were Class C

++Projectunder the %l~g Research—Cowcil of the Ameri$an (/eldingSociety,

..

TWO additional series.:of underbead cracking tests were made,,..,,, ., ,..i.

using the’% per Cantmckti’steelo One series was prepared from.,,, ?! ~,’):,;”,”“,::.

blocks w~ch had been homogenized’at~50F for 6 hours and normalized,. .....“,

a’t1600F~ “Anothei series was welded’usirqglow-hydrogen lime-ferritic.,.

elect~de~. TM ho~;genized series gave 5 per cent macking, while use,,, ,,

of”’tliel’~-xgen ~lect~odes reduced craqking to 1 per cent. These

tests confirmed the belief that the underbead cracking in these steels.,;, ., !,

. ,.

was ~“~es~t of rnic%egreg~tiionsif manganese rich a~ea= parallel with,.., ..’. .<

‘ ‘the direction of rolling....... .,. .,.,.

Tee-Joint Tests ., . ;’

..

At thl.spoint, it was not known whether asteel ~uch as the

ope which gave 36,per cent underbaad cracking wo~d gi~ troufle in

service. It was decided to test Sorniof the

welding cmditions, in the form of tee-jdnt.,-.,i.,.

fhree’steels were pick~d for tee-joint tests., .,,

steels wder,simulated ship-,. ...

specimene. Originally,

which gave 36, 16 and O

‘parcept underbaad’crack$ng. Later, six other heats of steel were tested,,.

in tee-joints. “The additional steels w@re used *O dete~ine ifs in crack+.,

ing, tee-joints could be produced in any Ciass B or C hull steel, regard-.,

less of,underbead crack sensitivity. A series of t4ats using v’a~iousbr~S

of low-hydrogen electrodes was mad~ on the steel which gave 36 per cent

underbead cracking- Tests were also made with Iow-hydrogen+pe electrodes “

dried at 600F~ and el~ctrodes mk@hco%@oir@d.~a D~pa@me@:af ~f~e Spec- ~“

ifimmim~B49$6@tipa)~ spemVyiW’Omti~:C_tti~ ti~stm%

contents Other tests were made to determine the effect of

.—

,., ,,. ,., ,!, :.’:, .’.. ....1’. .. . . .

,,! ...

-25-

-,.

,, .,. ,. ,,). ,’ ..:.,-.~~

‘., ,: .>

,., .

pr+lea~, .hoinogenfzation,and a baiancad weldhg s~que~ce,on cracking in

tee-joints. , ,<,. -, ...-,’., :<:“ !,.’, .).~-

‘, ,..,,,..,

Tee-fotit+,Swc@eri and Proc~dure,., , ,, ..”,:.,”,::.,.,.,,:,.,-‘.-’

~, ‘. . . ,,

The orig~al tee-joint specimens consisted ofa I@e plite~- “

inches ,wideand 36 inches long, to which was welded a ~6-inch by 4-5+ch,.l,. ....,,,,

,.! ,; ...

bar for the leg of”the t~e. The c~~~ct~ng weld was a 45-de~ee’donble-

bevel weld, with a 3/16-inch root,opsning akdno land. The spdclmen

design and welding sequence are given in AppendixA, Figure A-$lo’tti”~’~,.

subsequent tests,the specimen lerigthwas reduced’to 24 inches -h ordeti

,.to conserve material. ,...,,,,

,.

The melding schedule used was as follows: ~ .,., .“

&i electrode class E6Q1O E7015 ~ ‘:Size of electrode, inch 3/16 3/16

..

, .,, ,,’’.-,, Root pass$ amperes ~60 160Volt$ 25 25

.. .. Other passes; Am~res 180 200,,.-Average speedz inches/

.< minute 6 7Number of passes ~

Following melding, sections,.

polishedz and Magnaflm inspecied~

6 9

were taken transtirse

Cracks found in these

>..

to th.e{yeldz

specimens started,.,

at the root of the welds below the fusion line and propagated down into’

the heat-affected zone in a stepwise path, apparently following banded

structure. Maximum crack depth was measured as the projected transverse

depth of crack,

by dividing the

tatal number of

excluding weld overlap. Average crack depthmas determined

sum of crack depths of the sections in the joint, by the

sections of the joint.

. . .

-26-,, ~, ,. ,...-;,: :,., ,.,,.,, ,,,,, ,. ,. .: .’.

Results of tea-joint ti~ts are summarized in the bar graph of,,, ,,,.

Figure l&

.. .,,... ., .,,.~,.,.,,,,,“l,/’. .,; ,...’.”’.’,’......-

~1-1-~Lcu_.E@wen TJ@lerbead,Crack Sensttiti’tv.,.?....

and~a~;~i~.~ Tee-Jotits--a, ---,,,, .,,),,,;,,,/,.,,,.,,. ,,.-f, jk ,2. ” .+..:; .-. ,

f.’r.. .- .’.!(. , ,.

., .,. ..,,.-

., .,, .’.,. . .

St@:s with high~derbead Cracking cr~cliedmorg in the @e-,!.;,,,;“,.,‘ ;>,. .,..?. ,,,,,,,-~,.’.,+-,,,. .,”.,.”,,~.”.,.,,..,. . . .. . ..L. ., .,. .- .’,.. ,.,...’..,,

joint than steel?,with low underbead cracking” Those s$ee~s w~th O,per ,,,1~.?~,.....!..’..’.,4’,.>’.,..,”..+:,:.”’, ,~’ ‘ .“‘: .+!.. .:: ,..-.’ ‘.1

cent inderbead,c~acki~g.+hada maxigmm tee-joint crack O*3 iuch deep~ ,..!: ,,;.., ... . . .’.’ :,.,,!’...,,.,,.,-,\.\, ,,, >,,

compared to 0.7-inch dqep,for the 36per cent steel~ ,,, ,~..::+..;:, ,. ..+. ,,,.,.’. ,:.i ~!::!.;,.’,.,,. ..7. ,“-t,,.

Iow-lqdrogen electrodes were used, co~p~red to 36 per cent cracking.- ..”,.,. ‘, ,.,’

resulted when E~~~O electrodes were~sed:’ ‘Itwas belieyed~ ~her~fore,,,,-.”

that less cracking would resylt if low-~drogm electrode~ were used on!,,, ,,.,,.

.,.,,,.

,.,..,.:, :

.:,.:

which

.-

tee-joints. Howev~r, it was found that tee-joj.fitcracking was increased,.

by the use of the low-hydroge~ electrodes.

““W5Xhliie:E7015electibdes with different coating mois~e content

amount of moisttietigedon H6i?_,’’66P193-l,there”was ‘no relation betweeil the

and crackitig~”‘%andA electrodes,’withl,03 per cent coating moibture gaye

Os40-inch maxim~kr”’crackdepth; while lir.andB, with but 0+27 pe~’cent’coating

mdisth%, gaveC~68~inch maximum ’;iackdepth~ The I&tter”was the deepest. .

crack obs~rved in the 24-inch-Zong tde~joint specimens--,.,.

,, ..,,.

.-

42’7-

A homogenizing heat’tr?atmen$ (~350F,fo~5 hours,Ynormalized’at,..

“160QF]prlo~ to,welding reduced the nmxlmum crack dep~h.in Heat 66P193-z.? ,.

(36per,cen~ undqrhbad.cracking)from 0rn4.6inch to.0~11 inch, andthe.,

avarage crack dept~,frgrn0.133inch t~ 0~03 inche Theee re,siiltscompare,,

with the reduction from 36 to 5 per ce,ntin unde~-beadcracking which

accompanied the homogenization of the steel. A 400F preheat also produced

a marked decrease in this type of craclking~ ,.

Effect of Balanced lJeldir,~WSeal~e~~~nJ~ackinp in Tee.JoiqQ——.,—<.+— —,—— —,.. ,-

.~ourtee-joints were made usi~g a,balanced weld~ng sequence og,,

Heats 2G169-1 and 7LY354.Zwhich gave 16 and 15 per cent und,erbea.d,crack-

ing, respectivelyfi By this sequence,,the root weld and the.second,pass

were made on ,oneside of ,thejoints and then the other s~de of the joint

was completed, aftq which the first side was completed- No cracking was

found in ,any of the fo~ tee-joints made-

ence in

Additional studies were made in an effort to explain,the differ-

cracking between the,steeis~, It was.felt,that some we~ness ,~nthe

I!zlldirection tight be the cause of the cracking observed in the joints*

Specially prepared.0~505-inch tensile specimens werernade to test several

steels normal to the ’platesurface. No correlation’was found between crack-

ing in the Iiee-jointsaad the properties of the steels in the ‘rl?tdirection.

,. ,,..,’

,.,,

., ,, .,,

Keyhole Charpy

several of the’~t~els~

-28-

,..

bars were made to test the noich sensitivity of’

“.The’specinenswer% lotia$~~s“othat ttie~otch was

parallel with the longitudir~ald.irectiouof the tee-jointsl,s0that stress-. . -,,. >..,, .. L..,,

would be applied in the,.,,,, .,,,,“..

steels gave high impact....’,.,,..,

.,-,,’ .,.,,..”,;. >, .,:

Definite causes.:.,,.,,,

,,

same direction as in the tee-joints. All .of.tl~e.,. ,, ,,.,..

values above -100F_,“.

,,,- ,..!:,!::. ... “,.,.?,!,.. ,.

...!.. ,’.. ,,, ” ,.,’,..,, ,.< .. .,, ,- .,”

f,ortee-joint cracking are no,ttio~.., If,,stress,+.,,, ., ... ,,.

alone were the cmse, then the tee-joint crecking wo~d not hav~ ,been. .’,

reduced by preheat and homogenization. Ofione hand, tee-joint cracking,. ,,,.

appears to lm’influenced by the same rnechanismas unde~-beadcracking; i

because homogenization reduced the Cra-dc+ngin both; and tea-joint,-

cracking increased with an increase in t~e underbead cyack sensitivity.. . .: ..

of the steels$ On theother hand, the use of low-hydrogen electrodes.,,,,7,...:. ,.,

wit,$low molstu~e content which produce no, undeqbea~ cracks ipczmsed$. .,,. .-, ..

rather than decreased~ the amount of teewl-jointcracking-.,,.“

It is believed that the cracking,is somehow associated with,,

bending in the steels. However, more work of a fundamental nature is

needed to definitely determine the causes of this type of cracking.

,+

CONCLUDING STATEMENTS CONCERNING UNEERBEADCRACKING AND WJOTNT CRACKING—f———

,~. .,:>..

‘The follot~ing’”donc~usions

cracking and”tee-joint cracking$

were drawn concerning underbead

,,

-- .-

,- ;29.-

1* ,Qn;the b.asisof,the::t~~t,results, $t appears that thereis little danger from..pndeibead “@@@lg b“ %hq.Am” C1-a$sB steels.” Grack$mg $an 6ccur,.@der sorueWeldiqg conditions

,.. ,.: ;.,.,,...’

ti some heats of”ARS $~eeis”which are on th~ high side of.,, thefickem~str~rauge~ IJost,heats.shwld give p,otrouble

‘-under~ny”.fig,rJ~~”~~el~iUgconditions. -,“..

2’; ; ““ ‘ ‘“”” “’ ‘“”’”If a bal~ce~ weldlfig””sequence’}is’u~edwith’proper inspec-tion and chipptng ot root’weldS~ it ap~ears that root weldc.~ackhig.,in tee-j,ointsmade,in both AES Class B and C steels,.. ,,

,,. can b,e‘control~ed?..: .,.,..,,, ,.,. ,.- ,.’.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTIIFRRES’EARCH :-—.#—.—— ——..—.,,,. ON TE%JOINT CILAC.KING.m.—— (-n ., ,.,

. . ,, ,, J,.,.?“

., ‘..

A study of ~he.results show that.the future work in tee-joimts,. ,,

should be divided into two ‘phaseswith objectives as followss-,.. ,., ,. ...:,,7. .’

%e.I - St,Utiythe,practictil~.dj~tmedti ‘th~tctin’be...—— .made immed;iate~~in ste~~ chemistry and’,welding,pTiacticesto elimi’nate”thist~e ofcisa~ktifgin AN. ‘steel‘of.pr@senZ.q~i”ty~

,’.

Pha,seI1.- Study fundamerit~~,mechanisrnqof,t@is,type ofcracking~ , ‘ .,””,

*,, ,,. ,.,,,. -,

,The.,f-ollomingwork was proposed’fOr~Fha56 1~, “.,.,

1.

.4

2“

. t.:. ...., ,..+... ... . .....

3.

.,, , ,,

DeteTmipe”~he’”effect’oncracking of a l~OF ptid$eatand.ixterpasst6mpe,r&@re..4 tife~lwhi~h’”givesre+,ative~yhigh cracking would be used with E6010 and E’7C15elec-trodes

Determine at what time in the welding sequence (first$second} third pass~ etc.) the cracking starts, A steelwhich gives relatively high cre,ckingjand one whtchgives low cracking would be used with E6010 or E7015‘9166t-POabsi-- “-”<”+ -----’”-- .“- .“’‘“ ~ ‘..Lo’-’

.,.” ,, .}-!:.. -.’,:,. , .,

Determine tineeffect on cracking in tee joints of meld-ing with E6010 or E7015 electrties!afOFSnd’cool.ing at ;that ambient temperature. (The same steel used in (1)and (2) would be used~]

-30-

‘“’,‘4*,.. ,,::,.”::

‘,,.-..

“’5i

,:,-,,

;..:6.

7.

The

1.

2.

St~dy th~ effects “of‘normalizationof:plk~es~:,be~.bre’welding’% joints “onc~cking~ (U{e’the same steel:s,in (1), (2)t”and ‘(3);’wi*b E@,10 or,.E~015.dl~ct.rodes.]

,.,.. ,,.

Make large tee’”jo,@swith E601O and E7@’5T~sing largefillets instead of 100 per -dentpenetratiofi”tieldstodetermine if cracking results. (Use ~h:%same s,teelsas in(l]$ (2)? (3),’and (4).] ,,”’:’, ,,,

,. !,

Co@are a’crack-sensitive steel ti~~a,nonciack+@sitivesteel by the nick-break to determifieIf tfiis’test mightbe useful far checking steels for this type of cracksensitivity.

Study the crack tendencies of an AN Class A steel b~using the tee-joint specimen with E601O and E7015electrodes.

fofi&ing work was proposed’for Phase II:

It is propodbd thatcomposition gradients in baridedsteels b~ determined by some stitable method (ticra-radio~aph~, electron microscope, etc.), aridthe ~~correlation of the kompos”itiongraditintsin the bandsof the steels’with their tendency to crack in lergetee-joint specimens be attempted.

It isalso Droposed tbatexhaustive studies”of thenonmetallic-inclusionsin the steel be tide todetermine if cracking correlates with the prespqceof certain concentrations of nonmetallic inclusions.Along with thi.s~udy, fractional vacu~ testqs,,~eePetch,”strain aging tests, etc., would be’r~ “ttidetermine the metallurgical propertles,of“the’steels.! ,,, ,.

. .

‘7. ,.

Data ’givenin this report are recorded in Battelle Laboratory Books.,.,,,:”, .,

Numbers 3240, 3~56, 4698, and 5390.,.,-

.. “’ \

FIGURES

,,-,-

~“%gu“<.-.- .- —

SONnOd H2NI 0061 ‘A5ti3N3 a 39 tiOS9V 7VLOL

.lm.---L-A-:’ --’ 8 t 1 ! 1 I I

o

Ii

I.Ll

c!)ii

z

LAml

m,fl-)~

( KWW03 H21VI+SONnOd H3NI 000’COl

‘aV07 WllWIXVW 01 A9H3N7

v

.,,=.,.,--,, -,, ,,,.

0

“1

I

. .

1+

k’

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0-1

Standard

\\\\\\\\\

E601 O electrode0.050 -inch notch

E6010

J

II‘lec+r*+

A\\\\\\\\\\-

z~O.090-inch

=///// electrode

120 -~ -40 0 40 80 I20 ‘i60”“f

Test Temperature, F

FIGURE 4. ABSORBED ENERGY VS. “~EMPERATURE CURVESSHOWING THE EFFECTS OF MODIFICATIONS OFWELDED “Br” STEEL KINZEL-TYPE SPECIMENSON THE TRANSITION TEMPERATURE RANGE.

,.-.

0-17136

..

12 -

10 “

8 -

6 “

4 -

2 -

T,050-inch notch depth

1-040 0 ~ 80

I 1 I 1 1 I I 1I20 160 200 240 280 3

Test Temperature, F

FIGURE 5. EFFECT OF NOTCH DEPTH ON TRqNSIT ION TEM-PERATURE RANGE OF WELDED “C’ S’tEEL KINZEL-TYPE SPECIMENS.

14

70F preheat and‘~~>~ 1150 F postheat

. . .

~~500 F preheat

I I 1 I 1 I

!0

-40 0 40 ~ 120 160 200 240 280 320Test Temperature, F

FIGURE 6. EFFECT OF PREHEAT AND POSTHEAT ON TRqq ;SITION TEMPERATURE RANGE OF WELDED CSTEEL KINZEL-TYPE SPECIMENS.

0-17138

22

20

18

16

14

12

0

0

6

4

postheot

400Fprehea-

‘eheaf

2

0-120 -80 -40 0 40 80 I20 160 2

Test Temperature, F

FIGURE 7. EFFECT OF PREHEAT AND POSTHEAT ONTRANSITION TEMPERATURE RANGES OFWELDED KINZEL-TYPE SPECIMENS OF

Br STEEL.

.

)0

0-17137

2200

2000

1800

1600

~ 1400

p“c I200~

8 1000E# 8~

600

400

2m

.●

●

o 1 I 1 4 1 1 I

o 10 20 3040506070{

FIGURE 8.

Time, seconds

AVERAGE COOLING CURVES ONKINZEL-TYPE SPECIMENS USING10,70, 150,250,400 AND 500FPREHEATS,

0-17139

D

,,,

Bend Angle, degrees

0.07

o-of

0.06

0.05

0.05

O.w!

0.04(

0.02C

0.015

0.010

0,005

0.000

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40I

..‘~Weld metal, “C” steel 40 F. (Specimens general Iy broke.

before 0.2 in deflection. )....●

✎

✎

✎

✎

✎

✎

●

☛

✎

☛

✃

✎

m*...

9

●

.

*

XWeld metal ‘h’’ steel, 180 F

~Weld metal, “Br” steel, O F

Unwelded “Br” steel,

Unwelded “Br” steel,

/

t

/.

I— Fusion line of weld at .

center of specimen

+Unwelded “G” steel

‘We Id meto 1,“Br’’steel, 180F

/.

I I 1 I I I 1 I I I0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0,7

I0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 I

Def Iection, inches

-:

FIGURE 9. DEPTH OF CRACKS IN WELDED AND UNWELDED KINZEL-TYPE

SPECIMENS OF “Br” AND “C” STEEL, TESfED AT VARIOUS

TEMPERATURES, AND VARIOUS DEFLECTIONS AT M ID-SPAN.

0-17140

Location of crack in

oI Weld metal.=

@ Heat-affected

Notch root ~ ACss’\ \\\T \ @ Base metal4

0 6(30.07

0.06

0.05

0.02

0,0 I

(Notch root) 0.00

Defl

F

..\

GURE

1

0.5

‘i0.4

notch root :

zone

O CRACK PROPAGATION IN WEi_DED “c” sTEEI_ KINZEL.

TYPE SPECIMENS TESTED AT 180 F.

NOTE: THICKNESS OF WELD AfND HEATO-17U76

AFFECTED ZONE IS MAGNIFIED[00 TIMES AS SHOJVN.

Location of crack in notch root ~

~ Center sections

@ Edge sections

0,07

0.06

0.05

Averagq 0“04CrackDepfh,inch 0.03

(loOx)0.02

‘No’chroo’)0”00~~’3!0.01

t

Defl

INTO START CRACK. “’” > \l l\l I

u. {

0,8

0.91.0

1.0

FIGURE I 1. CRACK PROPAGATION IN UNWELDED “C” STEEL KINZEL-TYPE SPECIMENS

TESTED AT 180 F.

0-17077

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0“G’’Steel “C’’Steel “Br’’Steel

40 F 180F OF

—

—

“B/’Steel80 F

_ Energy to cracking, welded

~ Energy to cracking, unwlded

o Energy after cracking, tomaximum load

Crack depth:0,005 inchFIGURE IZ. COMPARIS”OIV OF ENERGY To cRAcK-

ING AND ENERGY AFTER CRACKING

ABSORBED BY WELDED AND UNWELD-

ED KINZEL-TYPE SPECIMENS OF “Br”

AIND’’C’ ’STEELS.

0-17081

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

FIGLJRF 13.

L-C Steel “c’’steel

40F 180F“Br’’Steel

OF 80 F

ENERGY AFTER CRACK ING ABSORBEDBY WELDED AND UNWELDED KINZEL-

TYPE SPECIMENS OF “Br’’AND” C”

STEELS.

0-17082

I

--1-Heat Test

No. NO

AG-214

AG251

66P-193-IAG-250[36%i ‘ )

LLASS”G” AE252

AC-233

AG-253

-t

AG-2501

AG-27 I

4~lp169-1 A&257

(16%)(1)

CLAS#c” ‘G- 263AG-274PG-276

AC-272

(15%)(’)CLAS~@”‘C-264

-----l=AG-256

71P200-I(OO/.)’ ‘ 1 AG-262

CLASSC” AG-270

1

71Y593 AG-273

(0%)( ‘ )

CLAdG” AC-265

-t

24P266-I~-?67(78,J:ICLAS~B”AG-=9

?2P236-I AG266(1%)( ‘ )

CLAS#B” *G-258

83Y578 ACF269(1%)(’)

CLAS~B” AC-261

66Y583 AG.268

(0%)(‘ )CLAS#B” AG-260

Elec-trodeGlass

E6010

E7015

E6010

E7015

E7015

E6010

E6010

E7015( 2 ]

E6010

E6010

E6010

E7015(2)

E5010

E6010

E6010

E6010

E6010

E7015(Z)

E7015(2)

E6010

E701512)

E6010

E7015[Z)

E6010

E7015f2)

E6010

E7015(2)

E6010

1

-engt h)f Tee,inches

36

24

24

24

24

24

24

24

36

24

24

24

36

24

24

36

24

24

24

24

2~

24

24

24

24

24

24

24

Varied Test

ConditionDepth Of Tee- Joint Crack, inch

o Ill 02 0.3 04 05 06 0,7

Standard test I{

Brand B, moisture 0.27”/

JBrand A, dried to0.18 %’0moisture

Brand A, maisture, 1.03”/

400 F preheat

Homogenized

Brand G,moisture < 0.40/0

Standard test

Standard test

Balanced weld sequence

(Maximum) 1

I

Brand G, moisture <0,4”/c

Stondord test

Standard test

Balanced weld sequence

Standord test

Standard test

Brand G,moisture~4”/,

Bfand G,moisture==O.4”4

Standard test

Brond G,maisture<O.4%

Standard test

Brand G,mowture<0.4°%

Standard test

Brand G,moisture <0.4%

Standard test

Brand G,moisture< 0.4”/,

Standard test

( I ) Llnderbead cracking

(2) Electrode$ meet Dswrtment of Defeme Specification hllL-E-9S6 Ehips)

FIGURE 14. SUMMARY OF TEE - JOINT TEST DATA, SHOWING HOW VARIATION INTEST CONDITIONS AFFECTS DEPTH OF CRACKING IN TEE-JOINT SPECIMENS

0-17029

\

~1 RECTION OF WELDING—~AL-i_ INCREMENTS

\

DISCARD

FIGURE A-1. WELDING DETAILS FOR TEE -BEND SPECIMEN MADE FROM :“ PLATE

O-8644

,l;:

CENTERLINE FOR EACH SPEGIMENIS LOCATED AT THE START OF

EACH WELD INCREMENT

Ji-

TIII

+

T

L

IT

—

—

I

I

T

—

k

1~ 9“-–-+

FIGURE A-2. MACHINING AND TESTING DETAILSFOR TEE-BEND SPECI MEN

0-8645

,,

it-

‘+4l1+411+41+-

SECTIONA A(ON & OF WELD BEAD)

(‘ROOT RADIUSImm (.039”) \

IDETAIL B

—

TOPSURFACEOF PLATE

mRELI EVE ROLIJ3 TO

CLEAR WELD BEAD

I-7’-]BENDING-J IG DIMENSIONS

FIGURE A3, BEND SPECIMEN WITH LONGITUDINAL WELD BEADAND TRANSVERSE NOTCHES (LEHIGH DESIGN )

O-8642

-.,. .. . ,.,..—. .__ -._, ,..__ —I$

-12- ?

~—~R-———_—— ——— .—

DI SGARD

~–

-~

DETAIL B

~___—.-–— —— —— ——

t

7 ‘m=*

J

DETAIL A

-l_‘+

DETAIL A

t T~ I

,1

T~

DRILL

16

-118

--

Ml~LED

DETAIL B

\ I , ,1

FIGURE tk4 BEND SPECIMEN WITH TRANSVERSE NOTCHEDWELD BEAD AND EDGE NOTCHES(NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY DESIGN)

13ATTELLE MEMORIAL INSTITUTE

O-8646

...

.,.

–13–

~ “’’-—————iI .—— ————————--———-——I

I

DISGARD II I

- D.R. ‘7T :‘m @?

\v7

~ ‘J

1

I DIs GARD IIL

I_—— ——— —-——— ——— —— I~SEE NOTCli DETAIL

I I“ 1---’” ---+---+---+ ‘

1

i---- “’----lBENDING - JIG DIMENSIONS

mIJ

*.

ROOT RADIUS &

INOTCH DETAILS

FIGURE A-5. BEND SPECIMEN WITH TRANSVERSE

BEAD AND TRANSVERSE NOTCH

(JAGKSON–TypE spEcIMEN) 58529

WELDING SCHEDULE GIVEN IN TABLE B-1

BATTELLE MEMORIAL INSTITUTE

0-0647

11

‘: “’’-+xzT;’’’ei-I

,.!

g ‘/ ‘“’ 4 &

D.R.tA IA

PROJECTSTEEL

g - L:”: i“ go

< ‘ 1[

T3“

i

I

k——————sl”~ fON LINE

y Y=/45°

050” TOP

wELD __––~_I _ SURFACE

META L

b

T

OF PLATE

BASEPLATE

ROOT RADIuS.01”

< J

SECTION-AA DETAIL B(ON % OF wELD BEAD)

FIGUREA6TENSION SPECIMEN WITH LONGITUDINALWELD BEAD AND TRANSVERSE NOTCH

I

BEND DOWN lBEND TIP~ 80° ~

I UP1

I 4“

(

1SR-4 TYPE A -1 GAUGES

\

SIDE OF. TENSION

TINNER’S RIVET # HOLE, +’ ‘:::I:!:SOLDERED TO

f ~~ ~“.+ ;“+

~CENTER OF NOTCH) IN SPECIMEN \

FIGURE A-7. DETAILS OF CLIP -TYPE COMPENSATING

STRAIN GAUGE SHOWING ATTACHMENT

TO TENSION SPECIMEN ( DEVELOPED AT

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA)

0-12164

.

1---———8”—blRECTION OF— ~.~ A A

ROLLING k T‘m

1

I1--- 4“

,Fu$ION LINE45*

u r.050”

btiWELOMETAL

/

YA

I

/ BASEPLATE [/

fy~~yp

c

.01”

:GTION AA DETAIOF WELD BEADI

ADIUS

pTOP

SURFACE

OF PLATE

i------ # -“+BENDING-JIG DIMENSIONS

FIGURE A-8. BEND SPECIMEN WITH LONGITUDINAL

WELD BEAD AND TRANSVERSE NOTCH

(K INZEL DESIGN)

‘..

•ATTE~LE MEMORIAL lMYTITUTE

a -’6643

-. —

-.

..

-.

\

Direction of rolling(

Standard Welding Sequence

Typical Tr

) Direction of rolling\

( !

Balanced Welding Sequence

‘ansverse Sections

FIGURE A-9. DETAILS OF TEE - JOINT SPECIMENS SHOWING LOCATIONOF SECTIONS

0-1702S

-.’.

APPENDIX B

.’ ,. , \ ,,

.. . . - ,.

‘ —.— - .—-

. . ,,

Type Test”‘ ...... . .,.,,.Naval Jackson ““’ “

Res. Lab. Transverse ‘ “~ .. .... Tee High Notched

Welding Details Lehigh Kinzel ,. Bend Constraint Bead Bend “

Electrode cle.ss “E601O.’ E6010 E603.O E601O E6w.12.. . ,.

Electrode diameter, in- j/16 ‘3/16 5/32 3/16 3/16

“Average welding currentl amperes :175 i75 U5 175 ‘- ’175 “’:. .

Average arc volts 27 27 25 27 “:”. . ~~ L :::,,”-,.... . .,, ,.

Average welding speed, in~/min “ 10 6 2,$ 6

~ .,, -

Length of weld beadj i~l,. 10 4 2.7 6 6

Lerigthof electrode per inch of weld,.

,78 1.4 3,6 1.4. 1.4

Initial plate temperature,F 75 75 75 75 75 . ... i ..

Coolingmedium Air Air Air Air Air

—— -. ,

. . ,-,-. ..’

..:

Medmicd Propertiessteel Type Thick- Yield Ultimate Elongation Iteduction Hardnesscode of ness, Steel Point$ StrengthJ in 2 In,j in 8 In:, ii Area, RockwellLetter Steel, In, Condition % $ % Bpsi psi .. .

--,.1.

@(3 Semiskilled 3/4 As rolled 32,200- 55960g- 4.3 33 71+3 58-633.4,600 ~~,6uo . !,

J1)(2)Semiskilled 3/4 As rolled 34,500- 61,500- 43”35

37,600 6$;500.,-.~(w) Semiki.lled 3/.4 As rolled 3534~~- 57,600- .45:... .:.-.... ----,-. 36$700 62,9WI.,

32

37-32

63-;0 66-69

62-53 58-62

~J(3) Killed 3/4 As rolled 37j2~0 62,500 30 m

—..—--—

Steel Code Chemical Caaposition. %—.Letter G Ml ~ ~ Cr Ni Mo Cu Al Sn N

5:T(l) 0.1$ O*73 “0*07 o.~o~ 0*030 O*O3 0.05” 0.006 0.07 0,015 0*012 0.005

0,2h 0.43 OXM 00012. 060z6 0G03 O*O2 0=005 0,03 0~,q16 0.003 0.009.,,

A(l) 0,26 0.50 0.03 0.03.2 0.039 0.03 0.02 0.006 0.03 ‘0..ou”0.003 G.004

0=20 0,52 0.23 oco13 “~.ol~ ~a071 0.10 0.010 0.17 ‘0.006 0.035 0.005-. ..., ..,, ,, ...-—— .,

(1) Boodberg$A., H. E. Davis, E- R. Parlser~a=~E-3:r ~JCauq,psof Cleavage Fracture in Ship Plate-Tests of Wide Notched Platesf+, ~~ldirw JOUTyalt April 1948*

.,.‘../..,,..,, .-’..,.,....

(2) The data for the mechanical proper+jie~are,the ~owe~t and ~ighe~t ,:J::;,,--...,-(3) Kahnt N. A.t

values obtaln~~”’’”~dp>’~achsteel.

and E. A. ImbemboJ ~~}~otch~e~sj-~j~tY Af Ste&l:Evalua~ed by the Tear Testl’S~e~i=-.-,.7,0,,’,.,-..,,,,.

JOUZVM1, April 1949*

,,