Materials Technology

Development of a Lean Duplex Stainless Steel

Mats Liljas, Pelle Johansson, Hui-Ping Liu, Claes-Olof A. Olsson

Outokumpu Stainless, Avesta Research Centre, P.O. Box 74,77422 Avesta, Sweden, mats.liljas@outokumpu.com

The classic series of duplex stainless steels shows very high corrosion resistance and can be used for very demanding applications. A new
lean duplex steel, LOX 2101® (EN 1.4162, UNS S32101), has been developed with corrosion resistance on a par with standard austenitic
grades. Application areas include: structural components, chemical industry, tanks and containers. The steel was designed to have equal
amounts of ferrite and austenite in annealed condition and with an austenite that is stable against strain-induced martensite. Thanks to its
high nitrogen content, the steel has a fast austenite reformation when subjected to thermal cycling, e.g. welding. Unlike conventional duplex
grades, the formation of intermetallic phase is very sluggish, although precipitation of nitrides and carbides has a certain impact on material
properties after exposure in the temperature range 600 to 800 aC. The precipitation behaviour after different isothermal treatments is
described and its influence on different product properties is shown. A good agreement was found between impact toughness and
corrosion resistance for a wide range of thermal treatments.

Keywords: stainless steel, duplex, corrosion, mechanical properties, microstructure, intermetallic phase, impact toughness

001: 10.2374/SRI08SP043-79-2008-466; submitted on 28 Jan 2008, accepted on 15 March 2008

Introduction
750
Duplex /--- .•
The description of an austeno-ferritic microstructure was ;'
first made in 1927 by Bain and Griffiths in their 2304 iSAF 2501'
comprehensive work on iron-chromium-nicke1 alloys [1]. 500
ro
The first duplex grades appeared commercially in the D-
1930's and attracted wide interest due to their high E OJ

strength combined with good corrosion resistance [2]. A ~

254SMO
gradual increase in knowledge and improved metallurgical rr 250
304 316 904L
techniques have resulted in modem duplex alloys,
optimised with regard to manufacturing and fabrication as Austenitic
well as property profiles. OL...- _
One of the basic features of duplex steels is the
Corrosion Resistance
relatively high chromium content that inherently gives a
corrosion resistance superior to that of standard austenitic Figure 1. Positioning of austenitic and duplex stainless steels.
steels. In addition, it is well established that the duplex
structure imparts a clear improvement in resistance to
chloride stress corrosion cracking (SeC) compared to Table 1. Typical chemical compositions (in wt.%) of some duplex
austenitic steels. Therefore, duplex steels have been used and austenitic stainless steels.
predominantly in fairly aggressive environments in
competition with higher alloy austenitic grades. Alloy C Mn Cr Ni Mo Cu N
In recent years, due to increased cost of raw materials, 2304 0.02 1.5 23 4.8 0.3 - 0.12
there has been an incentive to find stainless steels with ~ LOX2101 0.03 5 21.5 1.5 0.3 0.3 0.22
-a.;:l
lower contents of nickel and molybdenum. In this respect 0 2205 0.02 1.5 22 5.5 3.1 - 0.17
duplex steels have certain advantages due to the possibility SAF 2507 0.02 0.8 25 7 4 - 0.27
to replace these elements with nitrogen, manganese, and o 304 0.04 1.5 18 8 - - -
chromium. This is utilized for so-called lean duplex :~ 316 0.04 1.5 17 10 2.1 - -
grades. One such steel, Outokumpu LDX 2101® was
presented in 2002 [3]. The intention of this paper is to *
<
;:l 904L
254 SMO
0.02
0.02
1.5
0.5
20
20
25
18
4.3
6.1
1.5
0.7
-
0.2
describe the concepts for the development of this steel and
to give detailed information on phase stability and
corrosion properties. LDX 2101 (EN 1.4162, UNS S32101) has, as all duplex
materials, a higher strength than the austenitics. In terms
of corrosion resistance, LDX 2101 was intended to match
Basic Concepts the properties of type 304/304L. A higher alloy element
content gives enhanced corrosion performance as well as
Figure 1 presents the position of different stainless increased strength for both austenitic and duplex grades.
steels concerning strength and corrosion resistance. Against this background, the following goals were set for
Typical compositions of the steels are listed in Table 1. the design of a new lean duplex alloy:

466 steel research into 79 (2008) NO.6

 Materials Technology

100 .---.....-.---.....-.---.....-.---.....-.---.....-.---.....-.---.....-.---,......., 30

-Austenite c:
,-- -_ _- ---
Q)
c: 80 -- Ferrite ro> ....
o
n
~
'S
0- 25 I
--- --- ---------
LL. 60 W I
I
~
~ c: I
I
-Austenite
~
:::J I --Ferrite
~ 40 'iii
!~
Q)
5l 0::: 20
I'll 01 I Startprecipitation
5: 20 c:
=: i of ternaryphase
a::
i,
01..-_1..-_1..-_1..-_'--_1..-_1..-_'--........ 15
900 950 1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300
Temperature I'e Temperature I'e

Figure 2. Phase balance in LDX 2101 between 900 and 1300°C. Figure 3. Pitting resistance equivalent (PRE) for ferrite and
austenite at different temperatures in LDX 2101.

- A phase balance with 35-65% of either phase
- Good structural stability
- Yield strength, minimum 450MPa in plate products
- Good overall corrosion resistance, matching that of type
304. Superior resistance to stress corrosion cracking
compared to standard austenitic grades
- Good weldability with high austenite reformation in the
heat affected zone
Several manufacturing aspects also have to be
considered in the alloy design. These include parameters
such as castability, hot workability and pickling behaviour,
but will not be discussed in this paper. However, one
important factor when adding high levels of nitrogen is its
solubility in different stages. For a lean duplex alloy with
comparatively low chromium and molybdenum contents,
it is favourable to add manganese to avoid pore formation
during casting or welding, as well as nitride formation in
heat treatments. For these reasons a relatively high
manganese content was selected in this new alloy.
For the individual targets listed above, there are different
ways to predict the properties. For simulation of
microstructure, ThermoCalc® was used, as there is
generally good structural agreement with equilibrium
calculations for duplex alloys. In designing the
microstructure, at the solution treatment temperature, it is
not only the phase balance between austenite and ferrite
that is important, but also the composition of each phase as
this may influence the corrosion performance. Figure 2
shows the phase balance between 900 and 1300°C,
calculated using the ThermoCalc TCFE5 database. The
diagram indicates equal amounts of ferrite and austenite at
about 1130°C and about 35% ferrite at a solution heat
treatment temperature of 1050°C. This prediction deviates
slightly from what is observed in practical treatments
where the ferrite level approaches 50% after annealing at
1050°C. One reason for this is that the database does not
describe high levels of manganese correctly. When
calculating the phase compositions, it turns out that both
phases exhibit equal pitting corrosion resistance at about
1050°C, as illustrated in Figure 3.
In very general terms, structural stability can be
considered as the ability of steel to resist various
(undesired) transformations. For low-alloyed duplex
grades the austenite may have limited stability against
deformation-induced martensite. LDX 2101 is designed
with an austenite composition resistant to this behaviour.
Calculations using the regression model of Nohara et al.
[4] give Md30 temperatures of the austenite after annealing
at 1050°C which are around -30°C. On the other hand, it
is self-evident that a lower alloy content will give less
propensity to formation of undesired precipitates. For
duplex steels, the major concern has been the occurrence
of intermetallic phases such as sigma phase (c), since
these deteriorate properties rapidly [5]. With relatively low
chromium and virtually no molybdenum the stability
against o is high in LDX 2101.
Using the ThermoCalc database TCFE5, the maximum
formation temperatures for different phases have been
listed in Table 2. LDX 2101 clearly shows lower
temperatures for o formation than 2205 and 2304, while
the nitride formation starts at a relatively high temperature
due to the high nitrogen level. The experimental
precipitation behaviour ofLDX 2101 is presented in more
detail below.
There are different regression models describing the
influence of composition and microstructure on proof and
tensile strength [6]. However, there is no practical model
available that is able to predict the mechanical strength of
duplex stainless steels in a completely correct way. This is
mainly due to difficulties in describing the influence of
morphology and individual grain sizes of the two phases.
Nevertheless, nitrogen gives a large contribution to
strength, so a high level of this element is desirable. With
its relatively high nitrogen content, LDX 2101 has a
minimum proof strength of 450MPa in thick sections. Due
Table 2. Maximum formation temperatures (in °C) for different
phases in duplex stainless steels according to ThermoCalc TCFE5
database.
Phase LDX2101 2205 2304
Cr2N 940 975 880
M 23C6 830 865 846
Sigma 765 935 807

steel research int. 79 (2008) No.6 467

Materials Technology

to the finer structure thin plate and sheet materials exhibit 1100
proof strengths above 530MPa. The ductility is high and
the elongation rupture exceeds 30% even at the highest 1000
strength levels. 0
As indicated in the introduction, duplex stainless steels
0
-.. 900
~
in general show good corrosion resistance owing to their
high chromium content. The target of meeting the
corrosion performance of 304 was easily met and this will
-
::l
( ll
a;
0..
800 2304, 60J..
I"
,,---
---
-----_ ..
........--- ..--- ....
E
be illustrated below. ~
700 \
....:
The term weldability includes many aspects, such as the '\...~ ....

LOX 2~~~·,'~oJ··
600
applicability of welding methods, productivity and
weldment properties. For other duplex steels one main
500
concern has been the need for filler additions and the 0.01 0.1 10 100 1000
control of the heat input. The underlying reason is Time I hrs
ferritization of weld metal and HAZ and limited austenite
reformation, giving reduced corrosion resistance. With Figure 4. Iso-impact toughness curves for three duplex grades.
high nitrogen levels in the steel and nitrogen addition to
the shielding gas this problem has been greatly reduced
and LDX 2101 shows appropriate austenite contents in
both welds and HAZ after autogenous welding with low
heat inputs, such as in resistance spot welding and laser
welding [7].

Microstructure

Solution Annealed Microstructure. The solution-

annealed microstructure for LDX 2101 contains equal
amounts of austenite and ferrite. In general, duplex
materials show higher transformation rates for secondary
phases than their single-phase counterparts. The two-phase
structure creates a large area of interphase boundaries with
differences in concentration that may lead to high rates of
precipitation of intermetallic phases. Other factors
contributing to the rate of precipitation include the high
chromium level and the high diffusion rates in the ferrite Figure 5. Typical microstructure of LOX 2101 in as-delivered
phase. Among the precipitated phases, sigma phase is the condition. Light optical micrograph with austenite in brighter and
most frequently encountered in the literature [8]. If the ferrite in darker contrast.
chromium and molybdenum contents
are lowered, the formation of sigma
phase will be slower. This is the case
for the alloy LDX 210 I, where sigma Nitrogen Nickel Manganese
i
'1.7
phase formation rates have been
5.4
observed to be considerably slower 50
1.6
0.3 5.3
than for higher alloy duplexes such as 1.5
2304 and 2205, cf. Figure 4. 100 0.2 5.2
1.4
Figure 5 shows a typical 5.1
0.1
microstructure from hot rolled and 150 1.3 5
50 100 15 50 100 15
solution-annealed LDX 2101. The Distance, urn o Distance, urn 1.2 4.9
austenitic regions appear as bright
contrast. The elemental distribution
between the two phases is given in
Figure 6, which shows quantitative Chromium
1- 22.5 Molybdenum
0.4
PRE16
29
I
WDS (Wave-length Dispersive X-ray 22
28

Spectroscopy) maps from coil 27

50 21.5 50
material that was subjected to forced
26
air-cooling from IIOO°C after 21 100
100
annealing in a continuous line. The 25
full experimental details of the WDS 20.5
150 24
150
mapping are given elsewhere [9]. The 50 100 15 50 100 15
Distance, prn 20 Distance, urn 0.2 23
element with the strongest partitioning
between the different phases is
nitrogen, which is close to the detec- Figure 6. WOS mapping of main alloying elements together with a calculated PRE map.

468 steel research into 79 (2008) NO.6

 Materials Technology

tion limit in the ferrite « 0.05 wt%) and about 0.45 wt% corresponding selected area diffraction patterns (SAD).
in the austenite. Figure 6 also includes a map of pitting The EDS compositions for different phases are given in
resistance equivalent PRE (bottom, right), which was Table 4.
produced by summing up, pixel by pixel, the maps for Co-precipitation of carbides (M23C6) and secondary
chromium, molybdenum and nitrogen using the formula austenite (Y2) was found along the austenite/ferrite phase
PRE = [wt%Cr] + 3.3·[wt%Mo] + 16·[wt%N]. The boundaries. The carbides are fine particles between yand
partitioning of PRE values is more pronounced than
suggested by ThermoCalc simulations. The simulations
might overestimate the austenite content, thus giving a
lower partitioning of nitrogen.
PRE formulae are, however, highly empirical and do not
contain all factors affecting the corrosion resistance. The
alloying concept of LDX 2101 with high manganese and
low nickel contents deviates from the more common
grades that are designed with higher amounts of nickel.
Manganese has, for example, been suggested to have a
negative influence on the localized corrosion resistance,
but is necessary to enhance the solubility of nitrogen.
Other factors that also affect the corrosion resistance are
surface defects and inclusions. Such PRE formulae have
also been suggested [10]. For the duplex steel 2205,
Olsson and Homstrom [11-12] have shown that the
passive film is more laterally homogeneous in its cation
composition than the underlying bulk. This lateral Figure 7. Light optical microstructure of LOX 2101 after ageing at
concentration levelling was observed to continue a few 700°C for 100hrs.
monolayers into the metal and was suggested to be caused
by selective dissolution processes at the oxide/metal and
oxide/electrolyte interfaces. This would suggest that, at Figure 8. TEM bright field image (top) and electron diffraction
patterns (bottom) showing precipitates of y2, M23Ca and Cr2N in the
least for the pit initiation phase, large differences in bulk
LOX 2101 aged at 700°C for 10 hrs.
PRE between the different phases would be less important.
They would, however, be of significance for the
repassivation characteristics of the material where the
local pit chemistry is considered a critical factor for
repassivation [13].

Ageing and Precipitation of Secondary/Ternary Phases.

Precipitation of secondary/ternary phases can affect both
the resistance to localized corrosion as well as the
mechanical properties, mainly the impact toughness. A
series of heat treatments was made in the temperature
region 600-850°C for times ranging from minutes to 100
hours, see Table 3. These ageing treatments are not
representative for typical applications for LDX 210 1; the

,.
experiments were performed to investigate the stability of
the microstructure and its effect on different properties.
The microstructure after ageing for 100 hrs at 700°C is •
()(io~! ~()o

•. ••e••
•
• , ,. ·
given in Figure 7. . • til'
Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) was used to . 1~1()

identify precipitates after 10 and 100 hrs ageing at 700 "C. , •

• .... . '. ~ III
Figures 8 and 9 show TEM bright field images with
..·
'
,
•
.'•
•
•• ., . ~
Table 3. Heat treatments performed for LOX 2101.
. I ()(~I!\ 0011 1101, I(
• \
•
1 1
• I '

Temperature/X. Ageing time/ hrs • !. •

] ]0
• •
0.1 1 10 100
850 - - - x • • I I ()
• •
800
750
700
-
x
x
-
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x .
•
•
•
•
•• •• •• •
•
650 x x x x [()Ollu
600 - - x x • •

steel research into 79 (2008) No.6 469

Materials Technology

Yl. having the same crystallographic structure as the EDS and was confirmed by TEMIEDS (Table 5).
austenite y, and a cube-to-cube orientation relationship Nitrogen contents within the secondary austenite were
with the r-phase. The carbide lattice parameter, however, estimated using ThermoCalc. Compared to the normal
is three times that of y. Co-precipitation of MZ3C6 and Y2 austenite, r: is enriched in nickel and manganese, and
along the y-a boundaries is thermodynamically favourable, depleted in chromium and nitrogen. This finding is
as MZ3C6 is enriched in chromium, whereas Y2 is depleted. consistent with results reported elsewhere [5,14,15].
Within the ferrite grains and along ferrite grain boundaries, Both chromium and nitrogen enhance the corrosion
particles with a hexagonal structure were identified as resistance and the appearance of Y2 in the structure could
chromium nitride (Cr-N), The ferritic regions are be expected to decrease the resistance to localized
characterized by high diffusivity and low solubility of corrosion. The appearance of Y2 would be expected to have
nitrogen; both these factors encourage nitride precipitation only a limited influence on mechanical properties.
from the ferrite. Some intermetallic sigma (a) phase could However, when accompanied by precipitation of carbides,
also be found at the austenite - ferrite phase boundaries for a-phase and nitrides, the overall result will be a reduction
the longest ageing times (l00 hours). Compared to other in impact toughness.
duplex materials (2304, 2205), a-phase precipitation is
much slower [8]. Influence of Microstructure on Material Properties.
Secondary austenite appeared after ageing for only a few To gain an enhanced understanding of the link between
minutes. The shortest formation times were found at microstructure and product properties, it is interesting to
750°C. The composition of Yz was determined by SEM/ study the development of microstructure for longer times
and at intermediate temperatures, even though they are not
representative for real-life applications. Figure 10 shows
iso-impact toughness and iso-pitting potential plots for the
ageing experiments described in Table 3. The pitting
potentials were measured on ground surfaces using the
Avesta Multicell [16].
Both graphs in Figure 10 have a similar appearance and
show a strong correlation with the microstructure
discussed above. They both indicate at least two processes:
an initial decrease due to fast precipitation of
predominantly carbides and a second decrease in impact
toughness and corrosion resistance for times longer than
10 hours. This second decrease is explained by the
appearance of a-phase. The temperature at which a-phase
shows a maximum precipitation rate for LDX 2101 is
about 700°C. Figure 11 illustrates the location of pitting
corrosion attacks on a sample aged at 650°C for 100 hrs.
Figure 9. TEM bright field image showing the precipitates of y2, The selective attack is primarily located to the
M23CS, Cr2N and a-phase in LOX 2101 aged at 700°C for 100 hrs.
austenite/ferrite grain boundaries where secondary
austenite, rz. as well as carbides are found.
Table 4. TEM/EOS analysis of secondary phase precipitates in
LOX 2101 aged at 700°C for 100 hrs. The results are normalized Corrosion Properties
without considering carbon and nitrogen.
The design aim with LDX 2101 was to obtain a
EDS Composition (wt.%) Particle
Phase
size (urn)
corrosion resistance matching that of 304L for a wide
Cr Ni Si Mo V Mn Fe
range of applications. During the past five years, practical
M 23C6 73.0 0.8 - 2.2 - - 24.0 0.1-0.2
experience has shown this to be a low-end estimate for
Cr2 N 95.9 - - - 1.7 - 2.4 0.1-0.3 many applications. In terms of localized corrosion, LDX
a-phase 33.5 0.7 0.8 0.4 - 5.0 59.6 0.5-3 2101 can be positioned between 304L and 316L. For stress
18.2 2.6 - 0.3 - 6.6 71.1 1-2 corrosion cracking, it outperforms its closest austenitic
Y2
alternatives, whereas in terms of uniform corrosion
resistance, the relative performance of LDX 2101 and
Table 5. SEM/EOS analysis (wt%) of the main phases in LOX 304L has to be evaluated for each particular environment.
2101 aged at 750°C for 100 hrs. The results are the average of
five measurements for each phase. Uniform corrosion. LDX 2101 has a resistance to
uniform corrosion that compares well with the common
Phase Si Cr Mn Ni Mo Fe N PRE 16 austenitic grades 304L and 3l6L. Table 6 shows a com-
a 0.9 24 4.4 1.1 0.4 69 - 25 pilation of uniform corrosion data in selected media for
LDX 2101 and established austenitic and duplex grades.
r 0.7 22 5.3 1.9 0.2 70 0.3 28
The uniform corrosion resistance was estimated using the
Y2 0.6 17 6.2 2.7 0.2 72 0.2 21
Materials Technology Institute (MTI) test [17]. This is a

470 steel research int. 79 (2008) No.6

 Materials Technology

a) b) Iso-Pitting Potential I mVsee

Iso-impact toughness at RT I Joule
900 ,----~--~--~-----, 900
1001..lAcm-2
850 850 0'0

-
V 800
~ 750
:::l
1ii
800
750
Q> 700 700
0.
~
f-
650 650
600 600
550 '----_~~_~_ _~_ _ ___J
550
0.01 0.1 1 10 100 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Time Ihrs Time/hrs

Figure 10. The iso-impact toughness curves (a) correlate well with the iso-pitting potential curves determined using the Avesta multicell (b)

60 I I I
T
.t.
50 - -

40 - -
!?
;::: 30 - -
c- T
L
o 20 - T
T 1
L

10

o I I I

LDX2101 2304 2205 316L

Figure 12. Localized corrosion resistance of some duplex

stainless steels and austenitic material (316L) determined using
Figure 11. Selective attack initiated on secondary austenite after ASTM G150. The measurements were performed on ground
corrosion testing. The sample was aged for 100 hrs at 650°C. surfaces of samples in the as-delivered condition.

weight loss measurement in which parallel coupons from
MTI are included to ensure inter-laboratory compatibility.
Triplicate coupons are tested at each temperature. The test
runs for a total of 96 hours but two of the coupons are left
in the solution for only 48 hours.
The numbers given in Table 6 indicate the lowest
temperature at which the corrosion rate exceeds 127 urn
per year. As can be seen, the ranking depends on the
environment but it remains comparable for the grades
shown. For practical applications, it is important to
remember that even small concentrations of aggressive
species can have a significant influence on the corrosion
rate. Examples included in the table are 1% HCl with
addition of FeCl3 as well as H3P04 with addition of 2%
HF; both additions are highly corrosive and strongly
influence the corrosion rate. The results in Table 6 position
LDX 2101 in a region where standard austenitic grades
given since its corrosion resistance is not sufficient to give
a CPT above the freezing point of the electrolyte. The
results indicate that the steel grades LDX 2101 and 316L
have a similar resistance to localized corrosion.
Stress corrosion cracking. Duplex stainless steels have
an inherently better resistance to stress corrosion cracking
Table 6. Corrosion data from testing according to MTI-1 in
different solutions. The data indicate the temperature (OC) at
which a corrosion rate of 127 IJm p.a. is exceeded. BP = boiling
point; p = pitting attack, HAc = acetic acid.
...0
~
~
::r:
e <1J
~
N

such as 304L and 316L have been the preferred choice to ~

+
;:.?
0
0
~
'0
~
lI)
d ~
lI) ;:.?
0
;:.?
0
0
lI)

date. ~ ~
~

0
0'-

0
00

0
""'
:£
'0 0
00
:Ii
~
~

Localized corrosion. Figure 12 shows Critical Pitting Grade ~ ~

r/l
£
cr:
£ ""'
:£ ...
~
00
"J
~
0
~
Temperatures (CPT), measured using ASTM G150, for LDX
three duplex materials, with 316L included as a reference. 2101 55 20 75 30 100 40 105 >BP 85
2304 55 20p 65 15 95 35 95 >BP 95
The values were acquired from wet-ground surfaces of
material in the as-delivered condition. The error bars 304L 30p 20p - - 80 45 100 lOOp 85
represent one standard deviation. No results for 304L are 316L 30 25p 50 45 95 65 100 >BP 90

steel research int. 79 (2008) No.6 471

Materials Technology

deliquescence point, i.e. the temperature at a certain

humidity where a salt becomes a soluble liquid. This is the
point of most concentrated electrolyte - if more water is
adsorbed on the surface, it will lead to more dilute
conditions. Results from tests at the deliquescence point at
50°C are found in Table 7. LDX 2101 did not show any
tendency to SCC, while its closest austenitic equivalent
304L suffered extensive cracking.

Concluding Remarks

The results presented above show that the initial design

goals have been met with the new lean duplex alloy LDX
2101. In the annealed condition, the steel has almost equal
contents of ferrite and austenite. The austenite
reformation is also rapid upon cooling from high
temperatures. The structure is very stable against
intermetallic sigma phase formation as a result of the lean
composition. Other phases such as carbides and nitrides
appear as primary precipitates with some influence on
pitting resistance and impact toughness. For most practical
applications, the exposure times required for these
precipitates to form are seldom reached. The mechanical
properties for LDX 2101 are typical of duplex stainless
steels, with a minimum proof strength of 450MPa for
larger sections and 530MPa for thinner gauges. This paper
Figure 13. Backscattered electron micrographs of representative
cracks in LOX 2101, 45% MgCI2 155°C after 24 hours, from
has demonstrated that the localised corrosion resistance of
Johansson and Prosek [18]. LDX 2101 is at least on the level of type 304 and
approaching that of type 316L. Uniform corrosion
resistance in most environments is on a par with that of
Table 7. 304 and LOX 2101 tested with chloride deposits at 304L and 316L. The chloride stress corrosion cracking the
50°C, from Johansson and Prosek [18]. resistance is, as expected, higher than that of type 304
material.
Number of specimens
Thanks to its favourable property profile combined with
Material Exposure time MgCh csci, low raw material costs, LDX 2101 has been selected for a
[weeks] Failed due Failed due
Tested Tested wide variety of applications, replacing austenitic steels of
to SCC toSCC type 304 and also to some extent structural steels. This
304 4 I I I I paper concludes by giving some illustrations of existing
22 2 2 2 2 applications: In rural atmospheres, LDX 2101 shows very
LDX2101 4 I 0 I 0 good performance from the corrosion viewpoint, as
22 2 0 2 0 illustrated by a pedestrian bridge near Gaularfjell in
Norway (Figure 14a). Its mechanical strength makes it
ideal for pressure vessels. Another area where weight
reduction can be achieved thanks to the higher strength is
than their austenitic counterparts. A detailed compilation mobile tank containers. For very large storage tanks, the
of stress corrosion cracking (SCC) data on LDX 2101 has pressure from the liquid inside is the limiting design
recently been presented by Johansson and Prosek [18]. criterion, and thus it is possible to save material by using
The classic test for stress corrosion cracking is the higher strength plate and coil, especially for the lower
ASTM G36 U-bend in a solution of boiling 45% MgCh. sections. Tanks of up to 25m in diameter and 25m height
Examples of cracks after exposure to this environment are have been built with applications within pulp and paper as
given in Figure 13. For lean duplex grades, this test is well as chemical industry. Figure 14b shows some tanks
much too severe and all samples, even the superduplex at a seaside location. The number of applications is
grade SAF 2507, failed after 24 hours in solution [18]. A growing constantly as the advantages of LDX 2101 are
particular difficulty with ranking experiments for SCC is becoming more widely known among end users.
that other forms of corrosion may dominate and thus give
an erroneous impression with respect to stress corrosion Acknowledgement
cracking.
If the objective is to study highly concentrated The WDS mapping was made by Kaj Gronlund, Corr-
condensates, the most critical conditions are at the Control.

472 steel research into 79 (2008) No.6

 Materials Technology

References
(a)
[I] E.C. Bain, W.E. Griffiths: Trans AIME, 75 (1927), 166.
[2] J. Olsson, M. Liljas, NACE Corrosion 94, 1994, paper 395.
[3] P. Johansson, M Liljas, 4th European Stainless Steel- Science and
Market Congress, 10-13 June 2002, Paris, Vo!' 2, p. 153.
[4] K. Nohara, H. Ono, N Ohashi: J. Iron Steellnst. Japan, 63 (1977),
212.
[5] H.D. Solomon, T.M. Devine: Conf. Proc., Duplex Stainless Steels,
ed. R.A. Lula, ASM, 1983, p. 693.
[6] H. Sieurin, J. Zander, R. Sandstrom: Materials Sci. Eng., A415
(2006),66.
[7] E.M Westin, B. Brolund, S. Hertzman: Steel Research Int., 79
(2008), No.6, 473-481.
[8] H.-P. Liu, P. Johansson, M. Liljas: Proc Stainless Steel Science and
Market International Conference, Helsinki 2008.
(b) [9] E. M. Westin, S. Hertzman, H. Larsson, J. Agren: Element
Distribution in lean duplex stainless steel welds, to be submitted.
[10] J. E. Dowling, Y. H. Kim, S. K. Ahn, Y. D. Lee: Corrosion, 55
(1999),187.
[II] C.-O. A. Olsson, S. E. Hornstrom: Proc. Duplex Stainless Steel IV,
Glasgow UK, 1994, Abington Publishing, Cambridge UK, Paper
68.
[12] c-o. A. Olsson: Corrosion Science, 37 (1995), 467.
[13] R. C. Newman: Corrosion, 57 (2001), 1030.
[14] J.-O. Nilsson: Materials Science and Technology, 9 (1993), July,
545.
[15] J.-O. Nilsson: Acciaio Inossidabili, I (1994), 18.
[16] M. Berner, H.-P. Liu, C.-O. A. Olsson: Corrosion Engineering
Science and Technology, (2008), accepted.
[17] R. S. Treseder: in MTI Manual No 3, Materials Testing Institute,
Columbus OH, 1980.
Figure 14. (a) Pedestrian bridge and (b) storage tanks made of [18] E. Johansson, T. Prosek, Paper No 07475, Proc. NACE, Int.Conf.
LDX2101. Corrosion 2007, Nashville TN, Paper 07475.

Weldability Aspects of a Newly Developed Duplex Stainless Steel LDX 2101

Elin M. Westin 1 ), Bengt Brolund 2l , Staffan Hertzman"

1) Outokumpu Stainless, Avesta Research Centre, P.O. Box 74,77422 Avesta, Sweden; 2) SSAB Tunnplat, 78184 Borlanqs, Sweden;
3) Outokumpu Stainless Research Foundation, Brinellvagen 23, 10044 Stockholm, Sweden.

Duplex grades have, due to balanced chemical compositions of both filler and base metals, a weldability that allows for successful welding
using a majority of the technically relevant techniques of today. In order to fulfil the performance requirements several aspects must be
considered. In the heat affected zone (HAZ) the austenite reformation must be reasonably high and in the weld metal the microstructure
must be stable so that e.g. high productivity welding and multi-pass welding are possible, without precipitation of detrimental phases in
previous passes. This paper addresses the effect of alloying elements and thermal cycles on phase balance in the high temperature HAZ
(HTHAZ) of the newly developed lean duplex grade LOX 2101 (EN 1.4162, UNS S321 01). Bead-on-plate welds and simulated weld
structures have been produced and investigated using metallography, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron
microscopy (TEM). The results are analysed using the thermodynamic database Thermo-Calc and a model for phase transformation based
on a paraequilibrium assumption for ferrite-austenite transformation. In the temperature region outside the paraequilibrium domain, growth
controlled by diffusion of substitutional elements was considered. The analysis follows a model by Cahn regarding grain boundary
nucleated growth and the Hillert-Engberg model on kinetics of spherical and planar growth.

Keywords: Duplex stainless steel, welding, weld simulation, heat affected zone, HAZ, microstructure, thermodynamic modelling, impact
energy, impact toughness, phase transformation, kinetics

001: 10.2374/SRI08SP046-79-2008-473; submitted on 30 January 2008, accepted on 6 March 2008

Introduction feature is also the lower nickel content compared to the

austenitic grades and higher weldability than the ferritic
The rapid increase in the use of duplex stainless steel is grades. The development of DSS has followed two routes
primarily due to the excellent mechanical properties in after the introduction of the modem 22Cr duplex grades
combination with good corrosion performance. A key [1]; increased corrosion performance by increasing the

steel research into 79 (2008) No.6 473