Cargando…

The Influence of the Welding Process on the Ultrasonic Inspection of 9%Ni Steel Pipe Circumferential Welded Joints

This work aims to compare the ultrasonic inspection of 9%Ni steel joints welded with the Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW) process and Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process. These are the two most widely used processes used to weld pipes for CO(2) injection units for floating production storage and o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: da Cruz Payão Filho, João, Kimus Dias Passos, Elisa, Stohler Gonzaga, Rodrigo, Drumond Santos, Daniel, Pereira Maia, Vinicius, Russo Juliano, Diego
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7078718/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32098044
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma13040961
Descripción
Sumario:This work aims to compare the ultrasonic inspection of 9%Ni steel joints welded with the Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW) process and Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW) process. These are the two most widely used processes used to weld pipes for CO(2) injection units for floating production storage and offloading (FPSO) in the Brazilian oil and gas industry. The SMAW equipment is simple and portable, which is convenient for the FPSO; however, the GMAW process has the advantage of welding with high productivity. In this study we performed a numerical simulation using the software CIVA, 11th version, to analyze the behavior of ultrasonic longitudinal wave beams through GMAW and SMAW dissimilar weld joints. Ultrasonic tests were performed on calibration blocks drawn from both welded joints to evaluate the simulation results. The results are discussed with regard to the microstructure of the weld metal via electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) analyses. The SMAW process presented better inspection performance than the GMAW process in terms of attenuation and dispersion effects. Although the SMAW had a better outcome, for both processes the configuration of 16 active elements and a scanning angle of 48° resulted in an optimized inspection of the entire joint.