PORTABLE HARDNESS TEST TECHNOLOGY FOR ASSESSING TITANIUM WELD

QUALITY

Dennis Harwig Roger Spencer

Edison Welding Institute Edison Welding Institute
1250 Arthur E. Adams Drive 1250 Arthur E. Adams Drive
Columbus, OH 43221 USA Columbus, OH 43221 USA
Phone: 1 (614) 688-5132 Phone: 1 (614) 688-5216
Fax: 1 (614) 688-5001 Fax: 1 (614) 688-5001
e-mail: dennis_harwig@ewi.org e-mail: roger_spencer@ewi.org

Andy Joseph Harvey Castner

Edison Welding Institute Edison Welding Institute
1250 Arthur E. Adams Drive 1250 Arthur E. Adams Drive
Columbus, OH 43221 USA Columbus, OH 43221 USA
Phone: 1 (614) 688-5196 Phone: 1 (614) 688-5063
Fax: 1 (614) 688-5001 Fax: 1 (614) 688-5001
e-mail: andy_joseph@ewi.org e-mail: harvey_castener@ewi.org

Ben Grimmett
Edison Welding Institute
1250 Arthur E. Adams Drive
Columbus, OH 43221 USA
Phone: 1 (614) 688-5161
Fax: 1 (614) 688-5001
e-mail: ben_grimmett@ewi.org

ABSTRACT

Portable hardness testing technology was developed in this project and was based on an oxygen
equivalent (OE) database for CP titanium weld metals. The database was created by testing the
properties of full penetration autogenous welds made from a number of heats and using different
welding procedures. The OE relationship for Rockwell B hardness was used to calibrate the portable
hardness test procedure. The portable hardness tester was based on using the ultrasonic contact
impedance method. This study has shown that with careful attention to detail, portable hardness testing
can be used to assess the quality of cast weld metal that has thin oxide typical of purple and blue color.
Acceptance criteria depends on the intent of the welding application.

KEYWORDS

portable hardness testing technology, CP titanium, weld metals, welds, oxide, inspection

PORTABLE HARDNESS TEST TECHNOLOGY FOR ASSESSING TITANIUM WELD

QUALITY

Commercially pure (CP) Grade 2 titanium piping is now being deployed into seawater piping systems
to improve life cycle costs of NAVY ships. These piping systems are being fabricated out-of-chamber

83
due to their size, and may require shipboard welding. Since titanium is easily oxidized promoting the
formation of weld color, standard practice is to reject welds that have colors other than glossy silver or
straw. This practice has been required since the weld metal may have been embrittled. Contamination
of titanium weld metal by interstitial elements (oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, and hydrogen) reduces
ductility and toughness, while increasing strength and hardness. Contamination can be caused by poor
preparation and cleaning of the joint and filler materials prior to welding, poor shielding of the weld
zone, or impurities in the shielding gas. The weld pool is the most vulnerable to contamination since
diffusion of interstitial elements is very rapid in molten titanium. Titanium welds that were
contaminated while molten and have unacceptable properties must be fully replaced. Any oxidation
during welding promotes the formation of an oxide layer on the weld surface. Air contamination of the
solidified weld bead and heat affected zone (HAZ) results in surface oxidation. Excessive surface oxi-
dation produces welds with poor fatigue strength and fracture toughness.

Weld colors indicate that inert gas shielding during welding was somehow compromised. It is well
understood that weld color(1) indicates that oxidation has occurred. Weld color cannot be used to
determine whether the weld pool was contaminated. During out of chamber welding, weld color can
often be related to disturbances in trail shielding, which only affect the surface. This is because ti-
tanium has low thermal conductivity and slow cooling rates. Long trail shields are required to protect
the surface below 450°C to avoid color formation.(2) An inspection technique that can distinguish a
good weld from an embrittled weld was needed to avoid unnecessary repair. The cost of repair can
easily exceed ten times the cost of the original weld.

The portable hardness testing procedure developed in this project was based on an oxygen equivalent
(OE) database(3,4) for titanium weld metals. The database was created by testing the properties of full
penetration autogenous welds made from a number of heats and using different welding procedures.
The gas tungsten arc welds were alloyed with contaminated torch shielding gases to produce a range
of properties representing Grades 1 through 4. Regression analysis was used to develop improved OE
equations that relate the effects of oxygen, nitrogen, carbon, hydrogen, iron ,and weld cooling rate to
weld properties. The OE graphs and equations that were developed can be used to relate weld hardness
to tensile strength and ductility. The OE relationship for Rockwell B hardness was used to calibrate
the portable hardness test procedure. A weld metal ductility of approximately 20% tensile elongation
was related to a hardness of 88 RB (Figure 1). Twenty percent tensile ductility is the minimum
required for Grade 2 base metal per ASTM specifications. The weld metal goal for NAVY piping is to
meet or exceed the base metal requirements.

84
 % Elongation

60 .03 Fe, 10 C/sec

%Elongation = 328.55 OE2 - 260.64 OE + 65.818
R2 = 0.9141 .03 Fe, 28 C/sec
50
.07 Fe 15 C/sec

40 .07 Fe, 10 C/sec

% Elongation

.11 Fe, 11 C/sec

30
.13-.15 Fe
20% Elongation
20 .03-.06 Fe

10
OE = 0.2629
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
OE = 2C + 3.5N + O - 0.14Fe

Rockwell B Hardness

105
Rockwell B = 530.79 OE3 - 695.42 OE2 +
324.25 OE + 41.634 R2 = 0.8853
95
Rockwell B Hardness

88.46 RB
.03 Fe, 10 C/sec
85
.03 Fe, 28 C/sec
.07 Fe, 10 C/sec
75 .07 Fe, 11 C/sec
.07 Fe, 15 C/sec

65 .11 Fe, 11 C/sec

NDE .03 Fe, 10 C/sec
NDE .033 Fe, 10 C/sec
55 OE = 0.2629
NDE .11 Fe, 10 C/sec
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
.13-.15 Fe
OE = 2C + 3.5N + O - 0.14Fe .03-.06 Fe

Figure 1. Percent elongation relationship to OE and Rockwell B for CP Titanium Weld Metal

The hardness tester (Figure 2) used the electronic ultrasonic contact impedance method for
determining weld hardness readings. Both a 1 and 5 kg probe was evaluated on autogenous butt and
bead-on-plate, convex bead-on-plate, and lap joints. The latter two weld joints were fabricated using
ERTi-1 filler metal. The hardness of the samples ranged from 50 to 100 RB by using different welding
procedure and different air-argon shielding gas in the welding torch.

85
Figure 2. Portable hardness testing

Hundreds of readings were made on each sample using each probe to develop statistical confidence in
the test method, and select the preferred probe for inspection. A Go-No Go hardness procedure was
recommended based on the accuracy of the UCI hardness tester (Figure 3). The 5 kg probe was
preferred over the 1 kg probe because it had less error. The 5 kg probe gave better performance
because the coefficient of multiple determinations (R2) was higher (0.9347) for its calibration curve
relating laboratory Rockwell B hardness measurements and its standard of deviation (STD) was lower,
only +/-3.6 Rockwell B. The 1 kg probe had a lower R2 of 0.815 and a higher STD of +/-5.0 Rockwell
B. The MIC 10 instrument provided an average reading that can be related to Rockwell B hardness by
using a calibration graph (Figure 4).

The portable hardness tester must be calibrated on weld metal samples before each inspection. This
was required since the MIC 10 tester uses an electronic calibration procedure, which is sensitive to the
instrument and probe equipment condition. This testing procedure is strictly for cast weld metal and
cannot be used on base metal. Wrought base materials have cold work and significantly smaller grain
size resulting in increased hardness for a given oxygen equivalent condition. The acceptance criteria
for portable hardness testing depends on the welding application and the filler metal grade oxygen
content. The objective of the portable hardness inspection was to minimize the repair of sound welds
which only have surface oxidation. Through thickness contaminated titanium welds must not be
accepted to assure resistance to embrittlement.

Table I.
3 Testers
Krautkramer MIC 10 Krautkramer MIC 10
Piece # Lab
(1 KG. Probe) (5 KG. Probe)
Mean STD Mean STD Mean STD
1 55 0 66.2 5.8 59.8 4.3
2 64 0 77.5 5.2 69.0 3.5
3 68 0 78.1 4.9 70.0 4.2
4 71.2 0 68.9 4.3 64.2 3.4
5 77 0 78.4 6.2 75.9 3.7
6 84.1 0 82.6 6.0 80.2 5.1
7 84.3 0 81.6 3.9 78.2 3.1
8 86 0 85.3 5.1 83.6 4.8
9 89.4 0 86.7 7.6 84.5 3.6
10 92 0 90.3 2.7 87.8 2.2
11 92.4 0 83.8 5.6 86.1 2.4
12 99 0 94.2 3.0 91.4 2.4
Average 0 5.0 3.6

86
 Performance Test Results on 12 Titanium
Welds of 50 to 100 RB Range Hardness

100.0 Each point is an average of 200 measurements.

Calibration Offset Value = -7148
95.0
Portable Tester Reading (RB)

90.0 y = 0.5496x + 37.055

R 2 = 0.815
85.0
80.0
75.0
y = 0.7262x + 19.321
70.0 R 2 = 0.9347
65.0
Krautkramer MIC 10
60.0 (1 KG. Probe)
55.0 Krautkramer MIC 10
(5 KG. Probe)
50.0
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

Lab Hardness (RB)

Figure 3. Comparison of Rockwell Benchtop tester to Krautkramer MIC 10 tester

Calibration Graph for MIC 10 Tester

Using 5 kg Probe

100.0

95.0
Portable Tester Reading (RB)

90.0

85.0

80.0

75.0
Calibration
70.0
Curve
65.0 STD + 3.6 RB
60.0
Krautkramer MIC 10
55.0
(5 kg Probe)

50.0
50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

Lab Hardness (RB)

Figure 4. Calibration curve for MIC 10 hardness tester with MIC 205 - 5 kg probe

It was also recommended that only certain weld colors be eligible for disposition using the portable
hardness test. With increasing oxidation, sequential colors that form after glossy silver and straw are
purple, dark blue, light blue, green, then yellow before the colors repeat the pattern several times
before becoming dull gray and white where the oxide is thick and flakes off the surface. Purple and
blue colors were recommended eligible for disposition for acceptance by hardness testing. These
87
colors are representative of thin oxides that are less than 200 nm thick(5) and should not pose a risk to
severe oxygen penetration into the surface. All other colors on the weld surface inspection area should
require complete repair.

To conclude, industry had to be conservative and fully repair welds that have unacceptable weld color
in the past. This study has shown that with careful attention to detail, portable hardness testing can be
used to assess the quality of cast weld metal independent of weld color. Acceptance criteria depends
on the intent of the welding application. The inspection procedure can also be used for routine
titanium weld workmanship evaluation and welder performance re-qualification.

REFERENCES

1. Talkington, J., Harwig, D.D., Castner, H., and Mitchell, G. 2000. “Development of titanium weld
color inspection tools.” Welding Journal, March 2000.

2. Rudinger, I.K. and Wiegand, H.H. 1973. “On the scaling behavior of commercial titanium alloys.”
Titanium Science and Technology, Vol. 4, pp. 2555-2571.

3. Harwig, D.D., Fountain, C., and Castner, H. 2000. “Oxygen equivalent effects on the mechanical
properties of titanium welds.” Welding Journal Research Supplement, November 2000.

4. Harwig, D.D., Ittiwattana, W., and Castner, H. 2001. “Advances in oxygen equivalent Equations
for predicting the properties of titanium welds.” Accepted Welding Journal, March 2001.

5. Fukuzuka, T., et al 1980. “On the beneficial effect of titanium oxide film formed by thermal
oxidation.” Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Titanium.

88