International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijpvp

Comparative analysis of GTAW+SMAW and GTAW welded joints of duplex

stainless steel 2205 pipe
Liying Li a, *, Zhaoxia Du a, Xuezhen Sheng a, Meng Zhao b, Lixin Song c, Bin Han a, Xueda Li a
a
School of Materials Science and Engineering, China University of Petroleum (East China), Qingdao, China
b
Strong Construction Machinery Co., Ltd, China
c
Offshore Oil Engineering (Qingdao) Co., Ltd., Qingdao, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Duplex stainless steel (DSS) has good oxidation resistance, mechanical properties and corrosion resistance
DSS 2205 duplex stainless steel because of the austenite and ferrite two-phase coexistence characteristics, so it has been widely used in the
Welded joints petrochemical, ocean engineering and other industries. In this paper, the butt welding of DSS 2205 pipes were
Microstructure
conducted by the combination welding of gas tungsten arc welding and shielded metal arc welding (GTAW +
Mechanical properties
Corrosion resistance
SMAW), and full automatic GTAW respectively. The microstructure, mechanical and corrosion resistance
properties of two welded joints were observed and measured. The results show that the ferrite content in the
weld and the heat-affected zone (HAZ) of the GTAW + SMAW joint is higher than that of GTAW joint. The weld
Charpy energy of GTAW joint is much higher than that of GTAW + SMAW joint, while the Charpy energy of both
the fusion line and the HAZ of GTAW joint is slightly higher than that of GTAW + SMAW joint. The strain
concentration occurs at the grain boundaries greater than 45◦ , and the smaller the grain size is, the more
dispersed the strain is. The effect of the temperature on the pitting corrosion resistance is obvious. The pitting
corrosion resistance of GTAW + SMAW joint is significantly lower than that of GTAW joint, and the pitting
corrosion resistance of the root weld is poor, and the SMAW weld is worse than the GTAW weld (except for the
root weld). The ferrite phase proportion is related to the pitting corrosion resistance. In a word, the performance
of GTAW joint is better than that of GTAW + SMAW joint.

Author contribution statement fields. There are higher requirements in corrosion resistance, bearing
capacity, applicability, cost and other aspects. Combining the advan­
Liying Li: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - Review & tages of single-phase austenite and ferrite steel, duplex stainless steel
Editing. Zhaoxia Du: Data Curation, Writing - Original Draft, Visuali­ (DSS) has a balanced austenite/ferrite (A/F) two-phase structure, and
zation. Sheng Xuezhen: Formal analysis, Data Curation. Meng Zhao: the comprehensive performance of stiffness, strength and corrosion
Data Curation. Lixin Song: Investigation. Bin Han: Conceptualization, resistance is good [4–7]. DSS overcomes the performance defects of
Supervision, Funding acquisition. Xueda Li: Funding acquisition, ordinary pipe, and meets the complex oil and gas exploitation, trans­
Supervision. portation environment needs, so it has wide application prospects in oil
and gas transportation [8,9]. But it is difficult to weld due to some
1. Introductions problems such as unqualified A/F phase ratio and low corrosion resis­
tance of welded joint. So it is an urgent problem to improve its welding
With the development of engineering technology, the demand for oil, performance in engineering practical application [10–14].
natural gas and other energy is increasing. The pipeline transportation DSS 2205 as the most commonly used DSS is a typical representative
presents the characteristics of large diameter, high pressure and long of the second generation of DSS. Its welding methods include submerged
distance [1–3]. Facing increasingly harsh environment, traditional pipe, arc welding (SAW) [15], shielded metal arc welding (SMAW) [16,17],
such as carbon steel and low-alloy high-strength steel, gradually can not gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW) [16,18], plasma arc welding (PAW)
meet the increasingly complex exploitation environment of oil and gas [19], laser beam welding (LBW) [20–22], electron beam welding (EBW)

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (L. Li).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2022.104748
Received 16 January 2022; Received in revised form 10 July 2022; Accepted 12 July 2022
Available online 16 July 2022
0308-0161/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Table 1
Chemical composition of DSS 2205 (Mass fraction, %).
Material C Mn Si Cr Ni Mo N P S

Standard values ≤0.030 ≤2.00 ≤1.00 22.0–23.0 4.5–6.5 3.0–3.5 0.14–0.20 ≤0.030 ≤0.020
Measured values 0.018 0.98 0.41 22.49 6.1 3.38 0.16 0.021 0.009

Table 2
Mechanical properties of DSS 2205.
Performance Yield strength Rel/ Tensile strength Rm/ Elongation A/
MPa MPa %

Standard values ≥450 ≥620 ≥25

Measured 480 750 28
values

[23,24], flux-cored arc welding (FCAW) [25] and friction assisted

welding [26]. But fusion welding is a common processing method and
often used in manufacturing of DSS in engineering applications. The
optimal A/F phase balance in DSS is an equal fraction of ferrite and
austenite phases, while accepted ranges for austenite fraction are
approximately 60%–40% [27]. For base metal DSS, the A/F phase ratio
can be controlled by controlling the solid solution and aging tempera­
ture and time. Meanwhile, most of the current research focuses on the
effect of post-weld heat treatment (PWHT) on the microstructure and
properties of welded joints. However, for the welded joints, it is unre­
alistic to carry out solution aging treatment in engineering, so the bal­
ance of A/F phase ratio in both the weld and the heat-affected zone
(HAZ) will be severely destroyed, which will lead to the reduction of
corrosion resistance. Generally speaking, the greater the welding heat
input, the higher the high-temperature residence time, which helps the
ferrite to transform to austenite, and the higher the austenite content
[28]. In addition, there are many researches on the welding of dissimilar
steels in DSS [29]. However, there are few studies on the structure and
properties of DSS fusion welded joints as-weld. Fig. 1. Welding groove and welding sequence (a) GTAW + SMAW; (b) GTAW.
Therefore, in this paper, two fusion welding methods of GTAW +
SMAW, and full automatic GTAW are used to the butting welding of DSS Table 4 and Table 5, respectively.
2205 pipeline. The microstructure, mechanical and corrosion properties After welding test, the microstructures were observed by an optical
of the welded joints are compared and studied in detail. The research microscope (OM) and electron backscattered diffraction (EBSD). Frac­
conclusions can provide theoretical support and technical support for tography of the impact specimen was observed by a scanning electron
solving the welding problems of DSS 2205, which has profound theo­ microscopy (SEM). The mechanical properties of welded joint such as
retical and practical significance and engineering practice significance. tensile, bending, hardness and impact properties were tested according
to the standards of GB/T 2651–2008 (Tensile test method on welded
2. Experimental material and procedures joints), GB/T 2653–2008 (Bend test methods on welded joints) and GB/
T 2650–2008 (Impact test methods on welded joints). The schematic
The material used in the test is DSS 2205 pipe made in China. The diagrams of the mechanical specimen locations from the welded joint
diameter is Φ 114 mm, and the wall thickness is 13 mm. The chemical are shown in Fig. 3. The bending angle was 180◦ . The hardness was
composition and mechanical properties are shown in Table 1 and measured at a load of 10 kgf and dwell time of 15 s. The size of the
Table 2, respectively. The groove shape and welding sequence are impact specimen was 55 mm × 10 mm × 10 mm, and the test temper­
shown in Fig. 1. V-shaped and U-shaped groove are adopted for GTAW ature was − 40 ◦ C. The north location of impact specimen is located at
+ SMAW and full automatic GTAW, respectively. The welding sequence the weld metal (WM), fusion line (FL) and heat-affected zone (HAZ,
is root, hot, filling and cover welding. FL+1 mm) respectively. The processing process of impact specimen is
Two welding methods used in the test are GTAW + SMAW and full divided into three steps: (1) Cuboids of 90 mm 10 mm × 10 mm with the
automatic GTAW. For GTAW + SMAW, GTAW is used for both the root WM as the center were cut out. (2) These cuboids were polished smooth
and the hot welding, and SMAW is used for both the filling and the cover with a grinder, and then the WM was etched with aqua regia. The notch
welding. For full automatic GTAW, GTAW is used for the root, hot, positions at WM, the equivalent FL, and the equivalent HAZ (equivalent
filling, and cover welding. The welding equipment and schematic dia­ FL+1) were marked by line (Fig. 3). (3) Taking the marked line as the
gram of welding process is shown in Fig. 2. The welding materials are center, the impact specimen with a total length of 55 mm were cut out.
ER2209 welding wire with the diameter of Φ2.4 mm, and E2209-17 Then a v-notch processing machine was used to cut a notch with a depth
welding electrode with the diameter of Φ3.2 mm. The chemical of 1.8 mm and an angle of 45◦ .
composition of the welding materials is shown in Table 3. The welding The polarization curves were used to study the corrosion-resistance
parameters for GTAW + SMAW and full automatic GTAW are shown in potential. The specimen with size of 10 mm × 10 mm × 3 mm was

2
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Fig. 2. Welding equipment and schematic diagram of welding process.

Table 3
Chemical composition of welding materials (Mass fraction, %).
Material C Mn Si Cr Ni Mo N P S

ER2209 0.022 1.76 0.56 22.45 8.91 2.85 0.18 0.018 0.013
E2209-17 0.016 0.7 0.86 23.2 9.1 3.16 0.16 0.017 0.017

Table 4
Welding parameters for GTAW + SMAW.
1 1
Welding process Weld bead Weld materials Diameter/mm Polarity Welding current/A Voltage/V Welding speed/cm⋅min− Heat input/kJ⋅cm−

GTAW Root weld ER2209 2.4 DC- 85–110 9–11 4–7 6.5–18.1
GTAW Hot weld ER2209 2.4 DC- 90–120 9–11 6–9 5.4–13.2
SMAW Filling weld E2209-17 3.2 DC+ 85–115 21–24 7–9 11.9–23.6
SMAW Cover weld E2209-17 3.2 DC+ 85–115 21–24 7–9 11.9–23.6

Note: DC + means the welding piece is connected to the negative electrode. The welding wire is connected with the positive electrode (DC reverse connection). DC-
indicates that the weldment is connected to the positive electrode. Welding wire is connected with the negative electrode (DC direct connection).

Table 5
Welding parameters for GTAW.
1 1
Welding process Weld bead Weld materials Diameter/mm Polarity Welding current/A Voltage/V Welding speed/cm⋅min− Heat input/kJ⋅cm−

GTAW Root weld ER2209 1 DC- 70–135 8–10 4–7 6.5–9

GTAW Hot weld ER2209 1 DC- 60–100 8–10 6–9 7.2–10
GTAW Filling weld-1 ER2209 1 DC- 60–135 8–10 6–8 11.3–14.7
GTAW Filling weld-2 ER2209 1 DC- 60–150 8–10 6–8 12.7–18
GTAW Filling weld-3 ER2209 1 DC- 65–150 8–10 6–8 13.1–18
GTAW Filling weld-4–6 ER2209 1 DC- 65–150 8–10 6–8 13.1–18
GTAW Filling weld-7 ER2209 1 DC- 75–150 8–10 6–8 10.3–13.8
GTAW Cover weld ER2209 1 DC- 50–140 8–10 6–8 10.3–13.8

Note: DC + means the welding piece is connected to the negative electrode. The welding wire is connected with the positive electrode (DC reverse connection). DC-
indicates that the weldment is connected to a positive electrode. Welding wire connection with negative electrode (DC direct connection).

3
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Fig. 3. Schematic diagrams of the mechanical specimen locations from the welded joint.

Fig. 4. Macro morphology of welded joints (a) GTAW + SMAW; (b) GTAW.

corrosion resistance of stainless steels in the ferric chloride solution).

The size of pitting corrosion specimen was 50 mm × 25 mm × 3 mm. The
corrosion solution was 6% FeCl3 solution. The test temperature was
22 ◦ C and 50 ◦ C, and the test time was 72 h.

3. Results and analysis

3.1. Macro appearance of welded joints

The macroscopic cross-section morphology of two welded joints is

shown in Fig. 4. The welded joints are divided into four layers from
bottom to top: root weld, hot weld, filling weld, and cover weld. The
welded joints are divided into three parts from left to right: base metal,
weld and heat-affected zone (HAZ). The weld edges have good fusion,
and the interface between the weld and the base metal is obvious.

3.2. Observation and analysis of microstructure

Fig. 5. Microstructure of base metal.
3.2.1. Microstructure of base metal
inlaid with epoxy resin, and the surface of 10 mm × 10 mm polished Fig. 5 shows the microstructure of base metal DSS 2205 pipe, in
with sandpaper was used as the experimental surface. Using a standard which the white is austenite and the gray is ferrite, presenting an
three-electrode system, the sample was the working electrode, the car­ alternating band distribution, and there is no obvious secondary phase
bon rod was the auxiliary electrode, and the saturated calomel electrode precipitation.
was the reference electrode. The electrolytic solution was 3.5 wt% NaCl
solution. The potential scanning range was − 0.5 V-1.5 V, and the 3.2.2. Microstructure of weld
scanning speed was 0.33 mV/s. In addition, the pitting corrosion resis­ The microstructure of two welded joints is shown in Fig. 6. Fig. 6a,
tance test was carried out in accordance to the standard GB/T (b), (c) and (d) show the weld microstructure of GTAW + SMAW joint. It
17,897–2016 (Corrosion of metals and alloys-Corrosion test for pitting can be seen that a large number of dendritic austenite phases are
distributed at the grain boundary of ferrite, while a small number of

4
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Fig. 6. Microstructure of weld. GTAW + SMAW: (a) root weld; (b) hot weld; (c) filling weld; (d) cover weld. GTAW: (e) root weld; (f) hot weld; (g) filling weld; (h)
cover weld.

austenite phases are distributed within the ferrite grain. It is obvious that like and strip-like, and distributed at the ferrite grain boundaries. At the
the ferrite content in the weld of GTAW + SMAW joint is lower than that same time, a small amount of massive austenite precipitates in grain of
of austenite. Fig. 6e, (f), (g) and (h) are the weld microstructure of ferrite (Fig. 7b and f). For the filling-weld HAZ (Fig. 7c and g) and cover-
GTAW joint. It can be found that the austenite with obvious irregular weld HAZ (Fig. 7d and h), the austenite is still distributed in blocks and
long strips is evenly distributed on the ferrite phase. Also, it can be needles at grain and grain boundaries of ferrite, but the austenite grain
concluded that the phase distribution of GTAW joint is relatively uni­ size is smaller than that of the hot-weld HAZ. In addition, it can be seen
form, and the massive austenite phase is distributed at the grain that the ferrite content gradually increases from the root-weld HAZ to
boundary of ferrite. However, most austenite phases are distributed at the cover-weld HAZ for GTAW + SMAW joint. For GTAW joint, the
the ferrite grain boundaries in GTAW + SMAW joint. At the same time, it ferrite content of the hot-weld HAZ is 50% which is lower than that of
is found that the ferrite phase ratio of GTAW + SMAW joint is similar to the root-weld HAZ of 56%, and the ferrite contents of the filling-weld
that of GTAW joint, and the austenite content of the cover weld is lower HAZ and the cover-weld HAZ are 61% and 73%. In short, the ferrite
than that of the root weld for two welded joints. content of the cover-weld HAZ is the highest. This is because that the
high temperature time is short, resulting in a short transformation time
3.2.3. Microstructure of HAZ from ferrite to austenite and a high ferrite content.
Fig. 7 shows the HAZ microstructure. The HAZ microstructure of two
welded joints is similar to each other. The austenite of the root-weld
HAZ is mainly distributed in small blocks at the ferrite grain bound­
aries (Fig. 7a and e). The austenite of the hot-weld HAZ is mainly needle-

5
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Fig. 7. Microstructure of HAZ GTAW + SMAW: (a) root-weld HAZ; (b) hot-weld HAZ; (c) filling-weld HAZ; (d) cover-weld HAZ. GTAW: (e) root-weld HAZ (f) hot-
weld HAZ; (g) filling-weld HAZ; (h) cover-weld HAZ.

6
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Fig. 8. EBSD graphs of DSS 2205. (a) Euler graph; (b) phase graph; (c) band contrast graph; (d) KAM graph.

3.3. EBSD observation and analysis of microstructure line represents the small-angle grain boundaries less than 15◦ ; the green
line represents large-angle grain boundaries between 15◦ and 45◦ ; the
3.3.1. EBSD of base metal yellow line represents super-large-angle grain boundaries greater than
The EBSD graphs of the base metal are shown in Fig. 8, the blue line 45◦ . The left is for GTAW + SMAW joint, and the right is for GTAW joint.
represents the small-angle grain boundaries less than 15◦ ; the green line It is found that the HAZ width is small, and the microstructure of GTAW
represents large-angle grain boundaries between 15◦ and 45◦ ; the yellow joint (Fig. 10e) is more uniform and finer than that of GTAW + SMAW
line represents super-large-angle grain boundaries greater than 45◦ . joint (Fig. 10 a). Fig. 10b and (f) show that the Widmanstatten austenite
Fig. 8b shows the EBSD phase graphs with blue and red indicating ferrite precipitates in HAZ, and the austenite content in HAZ is much lower
and austenite phases, respectively. It is obvious that the base metal than that of both the weld and the base metal. The super-large-angle
contains only two phases with band-like distribution. The calculation grain boundaries greater than 45◦ of both ferrite and austenite in base
shows that the A/F phase ratio reaches 54.5: 45.5. As can be seen in metal and weld are more than that in HAZ (Fig. 10c and g). In addition, it
Fig. 8c, the grain size and boundary angle are clear, and the proportions is can be seen that the strain in GTAW HAZ is relatively concentrated,
of the super-large-angle grain boundaries greater than 45◦ in ferrite and while the strain in GTAW + SMAW HAZ shows uniform on the whole,
austenite phases are large. By comparing Fig. 8c and (d), it can be seen without obvious concentration.
that the super-large-angle grain boundary is likely to cause large strain.

3.3.2. EBSD of weld 3.4. Analysis of mechanical properties

Fig. 9 shows the EBSD graphs of the cover weld, the blue line rep­
resents the small-angle grain boundaries less than 15◦ ; the green line 3.4.1. Tensile test
represents large-angle grain boundaries between 15◦ and 45◦ ; the yellow The macro morphology of tensile specimens is shown in Fig. 11. It
line represents super-large-angle grain boundaries greater than 45◦ . The can be found that the tensile specimens of two welded joints are broken
left is the weld of GTAW + SMAW joint and the right is the weld of on the base metal. Fig. 12 shows the tensile test results. The tensile
GTAW joint. As can be seen, the microstructure of GTAW joint (Fig. 9e) strengths of welded joints of GTAW + SMAW and GTAW are 737.41 MPa
is more uniform and finer, and the grain size is smaller than that of and 741.67 MPa, respectively. The elongation rates of GTAW + SMAW
GTAW + SMAW joint (Fig. 9a). Calculations based on Fig. 9b and (f) and GTAW are 29.50% and 29.11%, respectively. The tensile strength of
show that the A/F phase ratios are 43.7: 56.3 for GTAW + SMAW joint GTAW + SMAW joint is slightly lower than of GTAW joint, but the
and 46.8: 53.2 for GTAW joint. Fig. 9c and (g) illustrate that the pro­ elongation of the former is slightly higher than that of the latter. The
portion of the super-large angle grain boundaries greater than 45◦ in measured tensile strengths are greater than the standard value of 620
both ferrite and austenite is relatively large. According to the compari­ MPa, so the strengths of two welded joints obviously conform to the
son between Fig. 9c, g and Fig. 9d, h, strain concentration occurs at the standard requirements.
grain boundaries, and the smaller the grain size is, the more dispersed
the strain is, as indicated by yellow color. 3.4.2. Bending test
The macro morphology of side bending specimens is shown in
3.3.3. EBSD of HAZ Fig. 13. It can be found that there are no cracks appear on the side
EBSD graphs of the cover-weld HAZ are shown in Fig. 10, the blue bending specimens of both GTAW + SMAW and GTAW joints when the
bending angle reaches 180◦ . Thus, it is concluded that the toughness of

7
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Fig. 9. EBSD graphs of cover weld. GTAW + SMAW: (a) Euler graph; (b) phase graph; (c) band contrast graph; (d) KAM graph. GTAW: (e) Euler graph; (f) phase
graph; (g) band contrast graph; (h) KAM graph.

8
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Fig. 10. Microstructure EBSD of cover-weld HAZ. GTAW + SMAW: (a) Euler graph; (b) phase graph; (c) band contrast graph; (d) KAM graph. GTAW: (e) Euler graph;
(f) phase graph; (g) band contrast graph; (h) KAM graph.

Fig. 11. Macro morphology of tensile (a) GTAW + SMAW joint; (b) GTAW joint.

9
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

the toughness of GTAW joint is higher than of GTAW + SMAW joint.

The fractographs of impact fracture are shown in Fig. 16. The macro
fractures show that the ductile region at the weld of two welded joints is
relatively large, while the brittle region at the fusion line and the HAZ is
relatively larger. The micro fractures show that two welded joints are
dominated by ductile showing that the fracture mode is ductile. The
fracture of both FL and HAZ of two joints contain crystalline fracture,

Fig. 12. Tensile test results of welded joints.

two welded joints is good.

3.4.3. Hardness test

The results of hardness test are shown in Fig. 14. For GTAW + SMAW
joint, the hardness of both the HAZ and the base metal is significantly
lower than that of the weld. For GTAW joint, the hardness of both the
weld and the base metal is slightly lower than that of the HAZ. The weld
hardness of GTAW + SMAW joint is much higher than that of GTAW
joint because the alloy element content of base metal is lower than that
of filling metal. And the replacement of Ni, Cr and Mo in filling metal Fig. 14. Hardness distribution of welded joints.
with lattice Fe atoms makes the lattice arrangement disordered and
difficult to move, which improves the weld hardness of GTAW + SMAW
joint. The HAZ hardness of GTAW joint is slightly higher than that of
GTAW + SMAW joint because the former has small heat input, fast
cooling rate, insufficient precipitation of austenite in HAZ and large
proportion of ferrite. The hardness value of two joints all meets the
requirement of maximum hardness value lower than 290 HV10.

3.4.4. Impact test

Impact test results are shown in Fig. 15. For two welded joints, the
order of Charpy energy is WM > HAZ > FL. It is also found that the weld
Charpy energy of GTAW joint is much higher than that of GTAW +
SMAW joint, while the Charpy energy of both FL and HAZ of GTAW joint
is slightly higher than that of GTAW + SMAW joint. The toughness is
related to the austenite content, the higher the austenite content, the
better the toughness. It can be seen that the order of austenite content is
weld > base metal > HAZ, while the austenite grain size of GTAW joint
is finer than that of the GTAW + SMAW joint. Thus the Charpy energy of
WM is higher than that of HAZ, and the Charpy energy of HAZ is higher
than that of FL for two welded joints, while the WM Charpy energy of
GTAW joint is much higher than that of GTAW + SMAW joint. In a word,
Fig. 15. Impact test results of welded joints.

Fig. 13. Macro morphology of side bending (a) GTAW + SMAW joint; (b) GTAW joint.

10
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Fig. 16. Fractographs of impact fracture. GTAW + SMAW: (a) notch at WM; (b) notch at FL; (c) notch at HAZ. GTAW: (d) notch at WM; (e) notch at FL; (f) notch
at HAZ.

11
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Fig. 18. Corrosion rate.

Fig. 17. Polarization curves of DSS 2205 and welded joints.
corrosion resistance of stainless steels in the ferric chloride solution).
Pitting test results are shown in Fig. 18. At 22 ◦ C. The corrosion rates of
Table 6 GTAW + SMAW and GTAW are 0.5707 g/(m2•h) and 0.02515 g/(m2•h),
Fitting results of the polarization curves. respectively. At 50 ◦ C, the corrosion rates of GTAW + SMAW and GTAW
Materials Passivation zone Passive current Pitting potential are 2.1884 g/(m2•h) and 0.07155 g/(m2•h). It can be seen that as the
range/V density/(A/cm2) EP/mVSCE temperature increases, the corrosion rate increases significantly, but the
DSS 2205 − 0.007–0.971 1.219 × 10− 6
0.971 corrosion rate of GTAW joint is significantly lower than that of GTAW +
GTAW + − 0.004–0.914 2.897 × 10− 6
0.914 SMAW joint. This shows that the pitting resistance of GTAW joint is
SMAW better than that of GTAW + SMAW joint.
6
GTAW − 0.174–0.944 1.563 × 10− 0.944 Fig. 19 shows the morphology of corrosion pits in two welded joints.
The statistics of corrosion pits in weld metal are shown in Table 7.
and the crystalline fracture of GTAW is more than that of GTAW + Considering the fact that the corrosion pits have small openings and
SMAW (Fig. 15b, c, e and f). For the weld of GTAW + SMAW joint large stomachs, the corrosion performance is compared by the number
(Fig. 16a), the boundary between the GTAW weld and SMAW weld is of corrosion pits. At 22 ◦ C, for GTAW + SMAW joint, there are no
very obvious. The GTAW part is an isometric dimple, while the SMAW corrosion pits on surface 1, and there are thirteen corrosion pits on
part is a shear dimple. As can be seen that the fracture of FL and HAZ of surface 2. But GTAW joint has no obvious corrosion pits on both surface
GTAW + SMAW joint shows micro morphology of river pattern and 1 and surface 2. This shows that the pitting corrosion resistance of
dimple (Fig. 16b and c). It is found that there is no brittle region at the GTAW joint is higher than that of GTAW + SMAW joint, and the resis­
fractures of the GTAW weld indicating that the impact toughness of tance to pitting corrosion of surface 1 is higher than that of surface 2 at
GTAW weld is better than that of GTAW + SMAW (Fig. 16d). This is 22 ◦ C. At 50 ◦ C, for GTAW + SMAW joint, the welds on both surface 1
consistent with the experimental results shown in Fig. 15. The FL frac­ and surface 2, especially near the HAZ, have obvious corrosion pits.
ture of GTAW + SMAW joint is flat, showing cleavage fracture. There are two corrosion pits on surface 1, and there are twelve corrosion
pits on surface 2. At 50 ◦ C, for GTAW joint, there are no corrosion pits on
surface 1, and there are three corrosion pits on surface 2. This also shows
3.5. Corrosion test that the resistance to pitting corrosion of GTAW joint is higher than that
of GTAW + SMAW joint, and the resistance to pitting corrosion of sur­
The dynamic potential polarization curves of two welded joints and face 1 is higher than that of surface 2 at 50 ◦ C. It is obvious that the
base metal 2205 are shown in Fig. 17, and the fitting results are shown in temperature has a significant effect on the pitting corrosion resistance of
Table 6. The order of passivation zone range is GTAW>2205>GTAW + welded joints. In addition, the pitting corrosion resistance of root weld
SMAW. This means that GTAW joint has the highest corrosion resis­ (surface 2) is poor, and the SMAW weld is worse than the GTAW weld
tance. Compared to GTAW and GTAW + SMAW joints, 2205 has the (except for the root weld). The reason is that the content of ferrite is
smallest passivation current density (1.219 × 10− 6 A/cm2) and the relatively high in root weld and SMAW weld, while the contents of Ni
highest pitting potential (0.971 V), indicating that the anodic oxide film and Mo in the ferrite are relatively low, resulting in poor corrosion
has good compactness and 2205 has the best corrosion resistance. For resistance in non-oxidizing media. Also, it can be seen that the corrosion
GTAW joint, the passivation current density and pitting potential are pits located in weld are lamellar and tubular. Meanwhile, the corrosion
1.563 × 10− 6 A/cm2 and 0.944 V respectively. For GTAW + SMAW pits present the distribution of an ant net. This could be attributed to that
joint, the passivation current density and pitting potential are 2.897 × dynamic process, namely, at first, the migration of erosive anion Cl−
10− 6 A/cm2 and 0.914 V, illustrating that GTAW + SMAW joint has the through the passivation film, destroying the dynamic balance of disso­
worst corrosion resistance. Considering pitting potential and passivation lution and repair of the passivation film, subsequently, the passivation
current density, the pitting resistance order is 2205>GTAW > GTAW + film was fully ruptured and the corrosion pits grow deeper inside the
SMAW. grains. And the dynamic process is random and simultaneous in local
For the materials with serious pitting corrosion and no obvious positions with poor corrosion resistance.
uniform corrosion, the pitting corrosion resistance of the test materials
can be expressed by the weight loss per unit area and per unit time ac­
cording to the standard of GB/T 17,897–2016 (Corrosion test for pitting

12
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Fig. 19. Location and corrosion morphology of pitting specimens. Location of (a) GTAW + SMAW and (b) GTAW, corrosion morphology of (c) GTAW + SMAW and
(d) GTAW.

4. Conclusion energy is weld > HAZ > fusion line. The weld Charpy energy of
GTAW joint is much higher than that of GTAW + SMAW joint,
In this paper, the butt welding of DSS 2205 pipes is carried out by while the Charpy energy of both the fusion line and the HAZ of
combination welding of GTAW + SMAW and full automatic GTAW GTAW joint is slightly higher than that of GTAW + SMAW joint.
respectively. Using the relevant testing means to observe and measure (3) The strain concentration occurs at the grain boundaries greater
microstructure and mechanical properties of two welded joints. The than 45◦ , and the smaller the grain size is, the more dispersed the
main conclusions are as follows: strain is.
(4) The temperature has a significant effect on the pitting corrosion
(1) The ferrite content in both the weld and the HAZ of GTAW + resistance. The pitting corrosion resistance of GTAW + SMAW
SMAW joint is higher than that of GTAW joint. The microstruc­ joint is significantly lower than that of GTAW joint, and the
ture in the weld of GTAW joint is more uniform and finer, and the pitting corrosion resistance of the root weld is poor, and the
grain size is smaller than that of GTAW + SMAW joint. SMAW weld is worse than the GTAW weld (except for the root
(2) The tensile strength of GTAW + SMAW joint is slightly lower than weld). The ferrite content is relatively high in root weld and
that of GTAW joint. For two welded joints, the order of Charpy SMAW weld, while the contents of Ni and Mo in the ferrite is

13
L. Li et al. International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 199 (2022) 104748

Table 7
The statistics of corrosion pits in weld metal.
GTAW + SMAW GTAW

22 C◦
50 C◦
22 ◦ C 50 ◦ C

Surface1 Surface2 Surface1 Surface2 Surface1 Surface2 Surface1 Surface2

Number of pits 0 13 2 12 0 0 0 3
3.55 5.80 2.73 4.10
2.23 2.73 1.32 6.22
1.35 1.27 6.38
0.94 1.17
0.90 1.11
0.86 0.72
Pit size/mm 0.66 0.58
0.63 1.31
0.44 1.13
1.63 1.12
1.63 1.05
1.25 0.69
1.22
Average pit size/mm 0 1.33 4.27 1.18 0 0 0 5.57
Ratio of pit area to weld area/% 0 4.58 2.43 4.47 0 0 0 9.96

relatively low, resulting in poor corrosion resistance in non- [11] L. Li, J. Xiao, B. Han, X. Wang, Microstructure and mechanical properties of welded
joints of L415/316L bimetal composite pipe using post internal-welding process,
oxidizing media.
Int. J. Pres. Ves. Pip. 179 (2020), 104026.
[12] A.I. Mourad, A. Khourshid, T. Sharef, Gas tungsten arc and laser beam welding
Declaration of competing interest processes effects on duplex stainless steel 2205 properties, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 549
(2012) 105–113.
[13] J.S. Ku, N.J. Ho, S.C. Tjong, Properties of electron beam welded SAF2205 duplex
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial stainless steel, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 63 (1997) 770–775.
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence [14] S. Geng, J. Sun, L. Guo, H. Wang, Evolution of microstructure and corrosion
the work reported in this paper. behavior in 2205 duplex stainless steel GTA-welding joint, J. Manuf. Process. 19
(2015) 32–37.
[15] J. Luo, Y. Dong, L. Li, X. Wang, Microstructure of 2205 duplex stainless steel joint
Data availability in submerged arc welding by post weld heat treatment, J. Manuf. Process. 16
(2014) 144–148.
[16] M. Atif Makhdoom, A. Ahmad, M. Kamran, K. Abid, W. Haider, Microstructural and
No data was used for the research described in the article. electrochemical behavior of 2205 duplex stainless steel weldments, Surface.
Interfac. 9 (2017) 189–195.
Acknowledgements [17] X.F. Xie, J. Li, W. Jiang, Z. Dong, S.T. Tu, X. Zhai, X. Zhao, Nonhomogeneous
microstructure formation and its role on tensile and fatigue performance of duplex
stainless steel 2205 multi-pass weld joints, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 786 (2020), 139426.
This work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of [18] L.H. Han, T. H, G.X. Chen, B.Y. Wang, J.B. Sun, Y. Wang, Influence of heat input on
Shandong Province, China (ZR2017BEE065); and National Natural microstructure, hardness and pitting corrosion of weld metal in duplex stainless
steel welded by keyhole-TIG, Mater. Char. 175 (2021), 111052.
Science Foundation of China, China (51801233).
[19] R. Selva Bharathi, N. Siva Shanmugam, R. Murali Kannan, S. Arungalai Vendan,
Studies on the parametric effects of plasma arc welding of 2205 duplex stainless
References steel, High Temp. Mater. Process. 37 (2017) 219–232.
[20] C. Köse, Dissimilar laser beam welding of AISI 420 martensitic stainless steel to
[1] J. Ai, Y. Hu, H. Wang, X. Liu, Research progress on corrosion of stainless steel and AISI 2205 duplex stainless steel: effect of post-weld heat treatment on
its welded joint, Surf. Technol. (2021). https://kns.cnki.net/kcms/detail/50.1083. microstructure and mechanical properties, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 30 (2021)
TG.20210916.0950.002.html. 7417–7448.
[2] H. Zhang, F. Dong, J. Chen, Research progress on duplex stainless steel, Dev. Appl. [21] H.C. Wu, L.W. Tsay, C. Chen, Laser beam welding of 2205 duplex stainless steel
Mater. 23 (2008) 57–60. with metal powder additions, ISIJ Int. 44 (2004) 1720–1726.
[3] L. Li, J. Xiao, B. Han, C. Zhou, X. Wang, Welding L415/316L bimetal composite [22] C. Zheng, C. Zhang, X. Wang, J. Gu, Investigation of mechanical and corrosion
pipe using post-internal-welding process, Trans. Indian Inst. Met. 73 (2020) behavior of laser hybrid weld joint of 2205 duplex stainless steel, Anti-Corros.
675–689. Method. M. 68 (2021) 357–364.
[4] A.E. Odermatt, V. Ventzke, F. Dorn, R. Dinsé, P. Merhof, N. Kashaev, Effect of laser [23] L. Li, X. Niu, B. Han, L. Song, X. Li, Microstructure and properties of laser cladding
beam welding on microstructure, tensile strength and fatigue behaviour of duplex coating at the end of L415/316L bimetal composite pipe, Int. J. Pres. Ves. Pip. 195
stainless steel 2205, J. Manuf. Process. 72 (2021) 148–158. (2021), 104568.
[5] Y. Yang, B. Yan, J. Li, J. Wang, The effect of large heat input on the microstructure [24] T. Tamás, K. Sergii, H. Jonas, D. Klaus, Electron beam welding of 2205 duplex
and corrosion behaviour of simulated heat affected zone in 2205 duplex stainless stainless steel using pre-placed nickel-based filler material, Int. J. Pres. Ves. Pip.
steel, Corrosion Sci. 53 (2011) 3756–3763. 191 (2021), 104354.
[6] V. Muthupandi, P. Bala Srinivasan, S.K. Seshadri, S. Sundaresan, Effect of weld [25] Y. Zhang, Z. Liu, D. Li, Influence of aging temperature on metallurgy, impact
metal chemistry and heat input on the structure and properties of duplex stainless toughness and pitting behavior of flux-cored arc welded 2205 duplex stainless steel
steel welds, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 358 (2003) 9–16. joint: mechanics of materials, Mater. Trans. 62 (2021) 756–762.
[7] H. Tan, Y. Jiang, B. Deng, T. Sun, J. Xu, J. Li, Effect of annealing temperature on [26] S. Emami, T. Saeid, A. Abdollah-zadeh, Effect of friction stir welding parameters on
the pitting corrosion resistance of super duplex stainless steel UNS S32750, Mater. the microstructure and microtexture evolution of SAF 2205 stainless steel, J. Alloys
Char. 60 (2009) 1049–1054. Compd. 810 (2019), 151797.
[8] B. Ananya, M. Singh Preet, Stress corrosion cracking of welded 2205 duplex [27] Leif, Welding duplex stainless steels - a review of current recommendations, Weld.
stainless steel in sulfide-containing caustic solution, J. Fail. Anal. Prev. 7 (2007) World 5–6 (2012) 1–17.
371–377. [28] B. Varbai, T. Pickle, K. Májlinger, Effect of heat input and role of nitrogen on the
[9] S. Cui, S. Pang, D. Pang, Z. Zhang, Influence of welding speeds on the morphology, phase evolution of 2205 duplex stainless steel weldment, Int. J. Pres. Ves. Pip. 176
mechanical properties, and microstructure of 2205 DSS welded joint by K-TIG (2019), 103952.
welding, Materials 14 (2021), https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14123426. [29] K. Bettahar, M. Bouabdallah, R. Badji, M. Gaceb, C. Kahloun, B. Bacroix,
[10] K. Devendranath Ramkumar, D. Mishra, M.K. Vignesh, B. Ganesh Raj, Microstructure and mechanical behavior in dissimilar 13Cr/2205 stainless steel
N. Arivazhagan, S. Vitesh Naren, S. Suresh Kumar, Metallurgical and mechanical welded pipes, Mater. Des. 85 (2015) 221–229.
characterization of electron beam welded super-duplex stainless steel UNS 32750,
J. Manuf. Process. 16 (2014) 527–534.

14