STAINLESS Q&A

Q: Is it acceptable to use air carbon arc

gouging to produce a weld joint preparation or to remove defects found in 308L or 316L stainless steel weld metal either joints or cladding? Concerns have been expressed about carbon pickup from the carbon electrode causing damage to corrosion resistance of the stainless steel weld metal.

BY DAMIAN J. KOTECKI

A: This question has been around for more than 50 years, and recent discussions can still be found on the AWS Web site forum. It was considered by Hard (Ref. 1) already in 1954, although he did not look at low-carbon stainless steel. The concern usually expressed is that carbon contamination in the metal surface will lead to chromium carbide precipitation with resulting sensitization of the weld metal and/or heat-affected zone. Actually, there is a second concern that no one seems to mention. This concern is the dross and molten metal that is not blown away by the air stream will also experience nitrogen pickup from the air. If welding is done on the dross and thin film of metal melted by the air carbon arc but not blown away, this nitrogen will enter

Fig. 1 Proper air carbon arc gouging technique. the weld metal. Since nitrogen is an austenite-promoting element, ferrite content will be reduced and could potentially be reduced to a level low enough that solidification cracking could occur in weld metals like 308L and 316L, which are designed to contain some ferrite. The manufacturers of air carbon arc gouging equipment provide lots of information on how to correctly apply the method to carbon steels, low-alloy steels, stainless steels, aluminum, etc. AWS C5.3:2000, Recommended Practices for Air Carbon Arc Gouging and Cutting, is an excellent resource for noncommercial information. The correct technique generally involves a pushing inclination to the carbon electrode, with the air stream directed

behind the advancing electrode. Then there are very specific recommendations concerning the correct current range for a given carbon electrode, the correct electrode extension, and the correct air pressure. Figure 1, reproduced from AWS C5.3:2000, shows the correct technique. Along with correct gouging technique, correct cleanup after gouging is essential. For stainless steels, this means grinding away all traces of dross and oxidized surfaces from the gouge area. Only a bright metallic surface should remain before welding is initiated. If this is done, with proper technique in the application of air carbon arc gouging, all traces of nitrogen pickup and carbon pickup will be removed and the ground surface will be quite suitable for subsequent welding. Low air pressure in air carbon arc gouging is a particular concern because it can permit greater depth of carburized and nitrided metal than normal grinding would remove. Christensen (Ref. 2) deliberately used low air pressure for air carbon arc gouging 304L stainless cladding as compared to a gouge done with proper air pressure and to a machined groove. Chips were removed by a superficial cut from each of the three surfaces then analyzed for carbon content. The surface prepared entirely by machining was found to contain 0.03% C. The surface gouged with proper air pressure was found to contain

0.04% C, and that gouged with low air pressure was found to contain 0.10% C. Next, each prepared groove was welded with low-carbon stainless steel (grade not specified), and the weld deposit was analyzed for carbon content. The deposited weld metal in all three cases was found to contain 0.03% C. Christensen further noted that nitric acid corrosion tests according to ASTM A262, on backgouged and welded root pass surfaces, showed no adverse corrosion results. Christensen does not state whether or not the gouged surfaces were subsequently ground to bright metal before the chips were taken for chemical analysis or before welding. From the overall tone of the paper, I believe that no grinding was done. Christensen also did not consider nitrogen pickup or ferrite loss. Even if Christensens results are based upon not grinding, I would not advocate welding over the as-gouged surface without grinding to bright metal. It is not good practice, from the viewpoint of producing sound, defect-free welds, to weld over heavily oxidized surfaces. And nitrogen contamination of the oxidized surface can result in lower than expected ferrite content and a possibility for cracking. A competent inspector can easily determine visually whether grinding to bright metal has been properly done before welding begins. As long as grinding to bright metal fol-

lows air carbon arc gouging, I see no reason that air carbon arc gouging cannot be an acceptable method for joint preparation of stainless steel or removal of defects from stainless steel welds before repair welding.
References 1. Hard, A. R. 1954. Exploratory tests of the air-carbon arc cutting process. Welding Journal 33(6): 261-s to 264-s. 2. Christensen, L. J. 1973. Air carbon-arc gouging. Welding Journal 52(12): 782791.

DAMIAN J. KOTECKI is president, Damian Kotecki Welding Consultants, Inc. He is a past president of the American Welding Society, currently treasurer and a past vice president of the International Institute of Welding, and a member of the AWS A5D Subcommittee on Stainless Steel Filler Metals, and the AWS D1K Subcommittee on Stainless Steel Structural Welding. He is a member and past chair of the Welding Research Council Subcommittee on Welding Stainless Steels and Nickel-Base Alloys. Send your questions to Dr. Kotecki at damian@damian kotecki.com, or to Damian Kotecki, c/o Welding Journal, 550 NW LeJeune Rd., Miami, FL 33126.