Abstract
This section discusses welding and related topics applicable to offshore structures. Process equipment fabrication for platform modules is not covered here since it is the same as for onshore facilities.
Contents
610 620 621 622 623 630 631 632 633 634 635 640 641 642 643 650 660 661 662 Codes and Company Requirements Fabrication Methods Platform Jacket Construction Platform Deck Structural Fabrication Offshore Installation and Hookup Steel Selection Considerations Material Types Methods of Manufacture Hardenability Toughness Testing Prequalification of Materials Welding of Joints Types of Joints Root Pass Welding Weld Profile Control Welding Processes Used For Structural Welding Welding Procedures Welding Procedure Qualifications Toughness Tests
Page
600-3 600-4
600-6
600-9
600-14 600-16
June 1993
600-1
Welding Manual
663 664 665 670 671 672 680 681 682 683 684 685 690
Weld Hardness Uphill and Downhill Welding Weld-through Primers Preheat and Postweld Heat Treatment Preheat Requirements Postweld Heat Treatment (PWHT) Quality Assurance Quality Assurance Procedures Inspection Considerations NDT Operator Qualification Welder Qualification Weld Repair Rates References 600-25 600-21 600-19
600-2
June 1993
Welding Manual
Inspection Codes
Offshore structures are inspected in accordance with several different codes. For the primary structure, the most commonly used are AWS D1.1, Section 10 for visual, radiography, magnetic particle, and dye penetrant examinations, and API RP 2X[2] for ultrasonic examinations. The crew quarters and buildings are inspected per AWS D1.1 Section 8. See Figure 600-1 for a summary of welding and inspection codes.
Fig. 600-1 Welding and Inspection Codes Design and Construction Code
30 CFR 25016 & API RP 2A17 30 CFR 250 & API RP 2A API RP 2A DOE D & C18 Notes CSA S47124/S471.125 CSA S47326/S473.127
Location
Gulf of Mexico West Coast West Africa North Sea Canada
Note
Welding Code
AWS D1.11 AWS D1.1 AWS D1.1 AWS D 1.1 or BS 4870, Part 119 CSA W5928/W59S129 CSA W47.122/W47.1S123
Inspection Code
AWS D1.1 & API RP 2X2 AWS D1.1 & API RP 2X AWS D1.1 & API RP 2X, BS 550020 or ASME Code21 CSA W5928/W59S129 CSA W178.130/W178.231
Other Reference
BS 513511
June 1993
600-3
Welding Manual
600-4
June 1993
Welding Manual
Ground Fabrication
This stage of fabrication takes place at ground level at the final assembly yard. There are two types of ground fabrication: The components, such as a row of the structure, are ground fabricated and then rolled up into location. The components are fabricated away from the structure and then lifted pieceby-piece by cranes for assembly in place.
Roll-up panel construction is by far the most common method. The typical welding processes used at this stage are FCAW (both gas and self-shielded) and SMAW.
Erection Welding
Fabricators attempt to maximize the work done in the previous stages of platform construction in order to minimize the work required at the erection stage where scaffolding and access time are expensive. However, regardless of the basic method of fabrication, substantial amounts of welding must be done at the erection stage. The typical welding processes used at this fabrication stage are SMAW and self-shielded FCAW (the use of gas shielded FCAW is limited by the need for wind protection).
Welding equipment during offshore work can be a source of stray current corrosion to the jacket structure. This can cause a very significant amount of metal loss in a very short time and must be avoided.
June 1993
600-5
Welding Manual
Stray current corrosion results when the welding machine is on a workboat and the machine is grounded to the workboat rather than the jacket. Normal welding is done with reverse polarity, with the electrodes being negative and the current flowing from the negative electrode back to the positive ground. When possible, the welding machine should be placed on the structure to be welded, rather than on a workboat. When this is not possible, two leads should run from the welding machine to the workpoint and the machine should be grounded near the workpoint. The welding cables should be adequately insulated to prevent stray currents. Section 5.7 of the API Recommended Practice 2A, Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms, provides more details such as sizing the ground cable and monitoring the jacket and workboat potentials to ensure that proper grounding is maintained.
Normalized Steels
Conventional normalized steels have been widely used for joints on offshore structures, where strength, toughness, and weldability are all essential requirements.
600-6
June 1993
Welding Manual
Normalized steels are manufactured by hot rolling, air cooling to ambient temperature, and reheating to approximately 1650F (normalizing) with an air cool. These grades of steel get their mechanical and toughness properties from their chemistry (carbon, manganese, and microalloying with small amounts of niobium, vanadium, or titanium) and from the normalizing heat treatment. AWS D1.1 is directed towards using normalized steels.
Fig. 600-2 Typical Criticality and Redundancy of Steel Material Types
Definition Primary. Materials used for structural members and joint cans that are fracture critical and whose failure could mean loss of the structure. These may experience an unusually detrimental combination of stress concentration, rapid loading, cold work, high restraint, and thick sections. A typical use is for major joint cans in legs. Secondary. Materials used for members and cans whose failure would pose a threat to survival of the structure but whose thickness, cold work, restraint, stress concentration, input loading, and degree of redundancy justify less stringent requirements than primary-type steels. Typical uses are for brace end stubs and high strength chord joint cans. Redundant. Materials used for members that are sufficiently redundant so that their failure would not pose a threat to the structure. These members generally have a history of successful application in welded structures at service temperatures above freezing. Typical uses are for small tubulars and beams. Yield Strength, ksi 50 50 36 Typical Specifications API 2H, 2Y, & 2W; ASTM A633, A131, A537; BS 4360 ASTM A572, A709; API 5L X52; BS 4360 ASTM A36, A106, A53; API 5L Gr. B Supplemental Requirements C.E.(1), CVN(2), Z(3), CTOD(4) C.E. & CVN C.E. & CVN 1
Material Type
C.E. = Carbon equivalent requirements; refer to Section 630. CVN = Charpy V-notch toughness testing; refer to Section 630. CTOD = Crack tip opening displacement testing; refer to Section 630. Z = Through thickness or Z direction tensile testing per API 2H Supplemental Requirement S5.
June 1993
600-7
Welding Manual
633 Hardenability
Carbon Equivalent (C.E.) Formulas The chemistry of the steel has a significant influence on the steels weldability. The effects of chemistry are quantified by an empirical carbon equivalent formula. Carbon equivalent corresponds to hardenability; a main goal in welding is to limit hardening, so a low carbon equivalent is desirable. Numerous carbon equivalent formulas have been developed. The two most common are the International Institute of Welding (IIW) Carbon Equivalent (C.E.) and the Pcm (formulas follow): C.E. = C + Mn/6 + (Cr + Mo + V)/5 + (Ni + Cu)/15 Pcm = C + Si/30 + (Mn + Cu + Cr)/20 + Ni/60 + Mo/15 + V/10 + 5B To assure adequate weldability of the steel, the carbon equivalent is limited to a maximum value. Several other variables also influence the weldability. Section 670 discusses alternate methods for determination of minimum preheat for offshore structures. Refer to Section 140 for a more thorough discussion of preheat.
600-8
June 1993
Welding Manual
June 1993
600-9
Welding Manual
600-10
June 1993
Welding Manual
When buttering of one-sided full penetration butt joints is necessary, it should be done prior to fit-up of the joint, or the brace should be removed before buttering, as one-sided joints are very difficult to butter when in position. If the Contractors plans are to butter joints while in position, and the Company has agreed to the Contractors plans, special procedures should be developed and qualified to avoid improper buttering that results in internal root concavity (shown in Figure 600-4). This defect can be avoided by vigorous inspection after buttering and before welding. This should be part of the fit-up inspection. Butt joints have also been successfully buttered while in position using a ceramic backing strip, which is then removed prior to closing the weld. This is also shown in Figure 600-4.
Fig. 600-4 Buttering of One-sided Butt Joints
June 1993
600-11
Welding Manual
Fig. 600-5
600-12
June 1993
Welding Manual
Inspection
When the root pass can be inspected by radiography there is no problem, since root defects can be identified on the radiograph. Unfortunately, double wall radiography is impractical for thick members or large diameter members. The exposure times and safety rope-off distance required for double wall radiography are impractical for a platform erection site. For fatigue sensitive structures, there are limited options for inspection: The weld can be ultrasonically inspected, recognizing that the root area cannot be adequately inspected. In this case, the stress concentration effects and the fatigue life of the butt joints should be considered in the fatigue analysis. An access hole can be cut in the member by removing a panel, and an internal panoramic radiograph can be taken. This option is discouraged because the weld required to replace the removed panel poses the same inspection problem as the original weld. The Company has had very expensive problems with this detail. Joints can be classified by their fatigue sensitivity. Highly stressed joints (identified during design) can have their root and hot passes inspected by radiography prior to filling the weld groove. Or the root pass can be inspected using a borescope just prior to completing the root gap. Lower stressed joints are typically inspected ultrasonically.
June 1993
600-13
Welding Manual
For North Sea structures, the DOE D & C Notes do not recognize the disk test. Grinding or machining of the weld toe allows reduction of the hot spot design stresses by up to 30%, which has an effect on the fatigue design similar to using different fatigue design curves.
600-14
June 1993
Welding Manual
The FCAW welding process is not an inherently low hydrogen welding process. Gas shielded FCAW consumables are available that are classified as very low hydrogen (<5 mL/100 gm) by the AWS A4.3 method. The hydrogen content of the proposed consumable should be considered when determining the preheat requirements. If critical, it may be necessary to test each heat of consumable for hydrogen content. Shell did this for their Bullwinkle platform. Self-shielded FCAW. The self-shielded FCAW welding process was developed by Lincoln Electric Company. Presently they have no real competition in the selfshielded market. Because of the potential toughness problems with self-shielded FCAW, the Company allows only the Lincoln NR203 Ni 1%, NR203 Ni C, and NR203 Ni D consumables. These consumables nominally contain 1% nickel. The Lincoln NR 232 wire is not acceptable for primary structural welds. The Lincoln Electric wire feeder and constant voltage power supply are essential components of good self-shielded FCAW welds. Gas Shielded FCAW. There are a number of suppliers for gas shielded FCAW consumables. The essential requirements for making acceptable welds are adequate impact toughness and preheat consistent with the expected hydrogen content from the weld.
June 1993
600-15
Welding Manual
Monel Welding
Fillet welding of Monel splash zone sheathing is best done using either the GTAW or GMAW processes. Both are gas shielded processes so adequate wind shielding is essential to obtaining defect-free welds.
Whenever possible, the Contractors previously qualified procedures should be accepted. Prequalified procedures should be accepted when they meet the requirements (or intent) of the contract specification. However, prequalified procedures typically cannot be accepted when the contract specification requires Charpy Vnotch toughness testing, crack tip opening displacement (CTOD) toughness testing, microhardness testing, or postweld heat treatment (PWHT) for the weld procedures, as these tests need to be performed with the specific base metals and weld consumables to be used for the job.
Mockup Joints
AWS D1.1, Paragraphs 10.12.3.2 and 10.12.3.3 require sample joints using flat plate or tubular joint mockups for: welding processes and joint details that are not prequalified T-Y-K connections having groove angles less than 30 degrees
Fabricators are frequently encouraged to prepare mockups of any complicated joint details rather than just flat plate mockups. The member size of mockups should be scaled so that joint details are realistic (i.e., a 4-inch diameter stub on a 24-inch diameter can is not a realistic tubular connection). Note that AWS D1.1 does not permit prequalified welding procedures for full penetration tubular butt joints made from one side without backing.
600-16
June 1993
Welding Manual
The weld metal is usually impact tested near the outer surface of the weld. Some specifications also require weld metal testing at the root of the weld. The worst impact toughness is expected at the root of the weld, where the maximum amount of dilution of base metal with the weld metal occurs. The next worst location will occur in the final weld pass, where the weld has not been recrystallized by subsequent weld passes. Weld toughness is decreased by higher heat input and large weld passes (weave). The HAZ test location is typically 2 mm from the fusion line. Some specifications also require testing at the fusion line, fusion line + 2 mm, and fusion line + 5 mm. High heat input welding processes, such as SAW (particularly machines using multiple arcs) can adversely affect the impact toughness.
June 1993
600-17
Welding Manual
The hardness of the weld metal is primarily determined by the chemistry of the consumable. The hardness of the weld metal will typically be much less than 325 VHN10 maximum. Weld HAZ hardness is determined by the base metal chemistry (carbon equivalent) and cooling rate (welding heat input and base plate thickness). The base metal carbon equivalent is limited to decrease the hardenability of the weld HAZ.
600-18
June 1993
Welding Manual
June 1993
600-19
Welding Manual
Extrapolation of the BS 5135 preheat curves to lower carbon equivalent steels is not valid. Subsequent work done by The Welding Institute[13] has shown that this method is not sufficiently conservative when IIW C.E. is less than 0.40%. BS 5135 recommends that a C.E. of 0.40% be used for all steels with a C.E. less than 0.40%. This recommendation does not allow full advantage to be taken of the TMCP steels; therefore, using the Japanese methods described below would be more appropriate for these steels.
Japanese Pcm
The weldability parameter Pcm was developed by the Japanese[14]. It differs from the traditional IIW carbon equivalent equation. The Japanese parameter was developed based on low carbon (0.18%) steels and is therefore more appropriate for the modern low carbon steels produced by TMCP. Section 143 discusses the application of the Pcm parameters to HSLA and TMCP steels.
In practice, stress relief is usually avoided by CTOD testing the weld and weld HAZ to demonstrate that stress relief is not required. Refer to Section 634. For the North Sea, the DOE D & C Notes require that PWHT be applied to welds in excess of 50 mm (in excess of 40 mm if the hot spot stresses exceed 80% of the specified minimum yield strength of the base material). PWHT can be waived for thicknesses up to 100 mm if CTOD and Charpy tests confirm that the weld and weld HAZ meet the minimum toughness requirements. Above 100 mm, all welds must be stress relieved.
600-20
June 1993
Welding Manual
June 1993
600-21
Welding Manual
Preheat quality assurance methods Field quality assurance methods for proper weld procedure specification (WPS) application Itemized list of inspection hold points for the Contractor and the Company Notification procedures and sample forms for both hold points and ongoing inspections
Extent of Inspection
The amount of inspection for the primary structure varies very little among operating companies. The extent of inspection is based on the recommendations in API RP 2X. However, considerable variation exists among operating companies on how much inspection is required for secondary structural welds. These variations in the extent of inspection mainly result from the degree of familiarity with the fabricators and fabrication location. Spot inspection is usually adequate for secondary structural, redundant, and appurtenance welds.
Visual Inspection
In addition to the normal visual inspections carried out on welds, there are two inspections unique to offshore structural welding: Fit-up Inspection. On the primary structural welds, prior to welding one-sided full penetration butt joints and one-sided T-Y-K joints, a visual inspection is made of the root gap. Proper root gap is essential in getting the correct penetration in the root pass. If buttering of a joint is required, it should be done prior to the fit-up inspection. Another inspection must follow buttering. Frequent occurrence of wide gaps can be a clue that there is a dimensional control problem. Weld Profile Inspection. When specified by the fatigue design or when required by AWS D1.1 Section 10.13.1, weld profile inspections should be done using the disk test. The disk test is illustrated in Figure 600-6. A weld joint passes when a disk is placed anywhere on the weld and a 1 mm wire (big paper clip wire) will not pass through at the toe. The disk size varies based upon the thickness of the branch member, but U.S. dime or quarter sizes are typical. See AWS D1.1, Paragraph 10.7.5(1). Note that for improvement of fatigue life, toe cracks and undercut are more important than the weld profile (this is discussed in Section 640).
600-22
June 1993
Welding Manual
Fig. 600-6
Inspection Type
Visual (VT) Ultrasonic (UT) Radiographic (RT) Magnetic Particle (MT)
ASNT Level II
Tested by current employer. Current by test rather than experience. Qualified in accordance with AWS D1.1 Paragraph 6.1.3.1. All welds originally specified to be tested by ultrasonics are evaluated to API RP 2X Level C. When ultrasonics are substituted for radiography, the welds are evaluated to API RP 2X Level A.
June 1993
600-23
Welding Manual
It is important to define the method of calculating the repair rate for reporting. The way the repair rate is reported varies by fabricator, but the most common methods are by defect length for ultrasonic examination and by number of films for radiography. Based on these definitions, repair rates in excess of 4% for ultrasonic examination and 5% for radiography are considered excessive. Reporting repair rates by joints (or films) is the best indication of a contractors cost to repair welds.
600-24
June 1993
Welding Manual
690 References
1. 2. American Welding Society, ANSI/AWS D1.1Structural Welding Code Steel. American Petroleum Institute (API) Recommended Practice 2X, Ultrasonic Examination of Offshore Structural Fabrication and Guidelines for Qualification of Ultrasonic Technicians. API Specification 2B, Fabrication of Structural Steel Pipe. J. E. Price, TMCP Steels for Offshore Structures, Materials Laboratory Report: File 47.95, August 22, 1986. N. Yurioka, et al, Determination of Necessary Preheating Temperature in Steel Welding, Welding Journal, June 1983, p. 147-s. British Standards Institute, BS PD 6493, Guidance on Some Methods for the Derivation of Acceptable Levels for Defects in Fusion Welded Joints. British Standards Institute, BS 5762, Methods for Crack Opening Displacement (COD) Testing. API Recommended Practice 2Z, Recommended Practice for Preproduction Qualification for Steel Plates for Offshore Structures. Sumitomo Metal Industries, Kawasaki Steel Corp., Nippon Steel Corp., Nippon Kokan (NKK), and Kobe Steel Corp.
3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
10. K. J. Rodgers and J. C. Lochhead, Highland Fabricators, Self-Shielded Flux Cored Arc WeldingThe Route to Good Fracture Toughness, Welding Journal, July 1987, pp. 49-59. 11. British Standards Institute, BS 5135, Process of Arc Welding of Carbon and Carbon-Manganese Steels. 12. F. R. Coe, Welding Steels without Hydrogen Cracking, The Welding Institute, Cambridge (U.K.), 1973. 13. I. S. Matharu, et al., Heat Affected Zone (HAZ) Hydrogen Cracking Behavior of Low Carbon Equivalent C-Mn Structural Steels, The Welding Institute, November 1985. 14. Y. Ito and K. Bessyo, Sumitomo Metal Industries, A Prediction of Welding Procedure to Avoid Heat Affected Zone Cracking, July 1968. 15. B. J. Cocke, Summary of TWI Study on Hydrogen Induced Stress Corrosion Cracking of Welded Structural and Pipeline Steels, Materials Laboratory File 99.30, August 15, 1986. 16. 30 CFR Parts 250 and 256, Oil and Gas and Sulphur Operations in the Outer Continental Shelf; Final Rule, Federal Register, Friday April 1, 1988.
June 1993
600-25
Welding Manual
17. American Petroleum Institute (API) Recommended Practice 2A, Recommended Practice for Planning, Designing, and Constructing Fixed Offshore Platforms. 18. Department of Energy, Offshore Installations: Guidance on Design and Construction, London (United Kingdom): Her Majestys Stationary Office. 19. British Standards Institute, BS 4870, Approval Testing of Welding Procedures. 20. British Standards Institute, BS 5500, Specification for Unfired Fusion Welded Pressure Vessels. 21. American Society for Mechanical Engineers (ASME), Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Section X. 22. Canadian Standards Association, CSA 47.1 - 1983, Certification of Companies for Fusion Welding of Steel Structures. 23. Canadian Standards Association, CSA W47.1S1 - M1989, Supplement No. 1 M1989 to W47.1 - 1983, Steel Fixed Offshore Structures - Welding. 24. Canadian Standards Association, CSA S471 - M1989, Preliminary Standard General Requirements, Design Criteria, the Environment and Loads (Part I of the Code for Design, Construction and Installation of Fixed Offshore Structures). 25. Canadian Standards Association, CSA S471.1 - M1989, Commentary to CSA Preliminary Standard S471 - M1989. 26. Canadian Standards Association, CSA S473 - M1989, Preliminary StandardSteel Structures (Part III of the Code for Design, Construction and Installation of Fixed Offshore Structures). 27. Canadian Standards Association, CSA S473.1 - M1989, Commentary to CSA Preliminary Standard S473 - 1989. 28. Canadian Standards Association, CSA W59 - M1989, Welded Steel Construction (Metal Arc Welding). 29. Canadian Standards Association, CSA W59S1 - 1989, Supplement No. 1 M1989 to W59 - M1989, Steel Fixed Offshore Structures - Welding. 30. Canadian Standards Association, CSA W178.1 - 1990. Certification of Welding Inspection Organizations. 31. Canadian Standards Association, CSA W178.2 - 1990, Certification of Welding Inspectors.
600-26
June 1993