6th EEIGM International Conference on Advanced Materials Research

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 31 (2012) 012011

IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1757-899X/31/1/012011

Weldability charts for constructional steels

J C Ion1 and M F Ashby2
1

Division of Materials Science, Lule University of Technology, SE-97187 Lule,

Sweden
2
Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1PZ, UK
E-mail: john.ion@ltu.se
Abstract. The weldability of materials is still a poorly understood concept; a quantitative
assessment remains elusive. The variables associated with welding are reduced here into two
groups - processing parameters and material properties - from which two characteristic indices
are defined and used as the basis of weldability charts. For the case of constructional steels, a
carbon equivalent characterises both heat affected zone hardenability and the maximum
hardness developed after solid state phase transformations. The welding process is
characterised by its energy input. A mathematical model is used to establish relationships
between the indices, which are displayed on charts as contours of microstructure and hardness.

1. Introduction
Despite extensive research, the weldability of steels is still a poorly understood concept. It may be
defined in terms of various criteria: hardenability, sensitivity to cracking, limits on distortion etc. Even
within the context of the hardenability of steels, different interpretations are applied: a maximum
acceptable hardness, or a microstructure containing a given amount of martensite. Unlike the
mechanical behaviour of materials, which follows well established rules that can be used to define
material performance indices [1], a numerical measure of weldability remains elusive. Attempts have
been made to model the effect of weld energy input on the properties of the heat affected zone (HAZ)
of carbon steels, which led to the development of welding diagrams [2-4]. Such treatment enables
weld properties to be displayed graphically in terms of the principal process variables.
Here we define weldability in terms of two quantities that characterise i) the material being welded
and ii) the welding process. The material index describes both the hardenability of the steel and the
hardness of solid state transformation products, and is based on composition through the use of a
simple carbon equivalent formula. The process index characterises the property of the welding process
most relevant to weldability - its energy input. Figure 1 shows a chart constructed using these indices,
in which welding processes are displayed based on their energy, and steels are indicated according to
typical ranges of carbon equivalent. Below we describe how the indices can be used with analytical
models of thermal cycles induced in the HAZ adjacent to the fusion line (where hardness reaches a
maximum) and in empirical descriptions of the subsequent phase transformations. Model-based
relationships between the indices inform the features of the weldability charts that are constructed.
___________________________
1
To whom correspondence should be addressed

Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd

6th EEIGM International Conference on Advanced Materials Research

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 31 (2012) 012011

IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1757-899X/31/1/012011

Figure 1. Empirical chart showing carbon equivalent ranges for various steels (bars) and typical
ranges of weld energy (energy flux) for various processes (boxes). SA = submerged arc, MMA =
manual metal arc. Note that weld energy is measured in MJm-2 and MJm-1 for thin (full penetration)
and thick (partial penetration) welding, respectively. There is no relation in this chart between the axes.
2. Modelling of weldability
2.1. Weld thermal cycles
The thermal cycle T(r,t) at a point in a fully penetrating weld HAZ (e.g. a laser weld) is [5]:

T( r ,t ) T0

Aq
1
r2
exp

vd (4 ct )1 / 2
4at
(1)

where T0 is initial (or preheat) temperature, A is fraction of incident energy absorbed by the weld, q is
weld power, v is welding speed, d is plate thickness, r is lateral distance from the energy source, and
for steels is thermal conductivity (41 Wm-1K), is density (7800 kgm-3), c is specific heat capacity
(420 Jkg-1K), and a is thermal diffusivity (12.52 x 10-6 m2s-1) [2].
Provided that the peak temperature lies above about 1000oC (i.e. the point of interest lies in the HAZ
close to the weld fusion line), equation (1) may be differentiated and solved to obtain the cooling time
between 800 and 500oC in the HAZ, t, for a two dimensional (thin plate) state of heat flow:
2

1
Aq
t

2
vd 4 c1
(2)

6th EEIGM International Conference on Advanced Materials Research

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 31 (2012) 012011

IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1757-899X/31/1/012011

where

773 T0

1073 T0 2

.
(3)

Corresponding equations may be derived in a similar manner to describe heat flow in the HAZ
produced by a surface point energy source (e.g. manual metal arc, metal inert gas, tungsten inert gas or
submerged arc welding), in which r becomes the radial distance from the energy source in a threedimensional (thick plate) temperature field:

T( r ,t ) T0

Aq 1
r2
exp
v 2 t
4at
(4)

Aq 1
t

v 2 2
(5)
where

1
1

.
773 T0 1073 T0
(6)

Equations (2 and 5) indicate that the quantities Aq/(vd) (thin plate welding) and Aq/v (thick plate
welding), which are measures of the weld energy input, characterise the cooling rate in the HAZ
within the austenite transformation range. These are used as the process index.
2.2. Phase transformations in the HAZ
Diffusion-controlled transformation of austenite to a transformation product i is modelled using the form
of the Johnson-Mehl equation relevant to nucleation on grain edges [6]:
Vi = 1 exp-{0.69.(t/ti50)2}
(7)
where Vi is the volume fraction of i formed after a time t, and ti50 is the time required for half the
transformation to occur. Figure 2 illustrates microstructural development as a function of cooling time
in steels and shows the times required for a given amount of transformation.
The transformation of bainite is thus described by:
Vb = 1 exp-{0.69.(t/tb50)2}
(8)

6th EEIGM International Conference on Advanced Materials Research

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 31 (2012) 012011

IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1757-899X/31/1/012011

where Vb is the volume fraction of bainite formed after a time t, and tb50 is the time required for half the
transformation to occur. The term tb50 is not always clearly defined in published data [7], and so is
expressed as a function of the time resulting in a bainite-free microstructure, tb0, and the time for a
ferrite-free microstructure, tf0; quantities that can be obtained easily from continuous-coolingtransformation (CCT) diagrams:

tb50 = exp(ln(tb0.tf0)2/2).
(9)
Any remaining austenite is assumed to transform to martensite. Microstructural transformation is then
characterised by:
Vm = 1 exp-{0.69.(t/tm50)2}
(10)
where Vm is the volume fraction of martensite formed for cooling with a characteristic time t, and tm50 is
the characteristic cooling time that results in a microstructure containing 50% martensite.

Figure 2. Chart showing model-based variation of microstructure and hardness with weld energy.
2.3. Hardness of austenite transformation products
A simple carbon equivalent Ceq is used here, and justified later:
Ceq = C + Mn/12 + Si/24
(11)
where element symbols refer to composition (wt%).
Cooling times that result in the formation of microstructures containing 50% martensite tm50, 0%
ferrite tf0, and 0% bainite tb0 as a function of Ceq may then be obtained by regression analysis of
published data for constructional steels [7]:

tm50 = exp(17.724 Ceq - 2.926)

4

6th EEIGM International Conference on Advanced Materials Research

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 31 (2012) 012011

IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1757-899X/31/1/012011

= exp(19.954 Ceq - 3.944)

(12)

tf0

tb0 = exp(16.929 Ceq + 1.453).

(13)

(14)
The volume fractions of the austenite transformation products martensite, bainite and a ferrite-pearlite
mixture, Vm, Vb and Vfp respectively become (equation (7)):
Vm = exp{ln(0.5).(t/tm50)2}
Vb = exp{ln(0.5).(t/

tb50)2}

(15)
- Vm
(16)

Vfp = 1 - (Vm + Vb).

(17)
Regression analysis of published data for welds in constructional steels [7] gives the following equations
for the average hardness of martensite, Hm, bainite, Hb and ferrite-pearlite, Hfp, in terms of the carbon
equivalent used here:
Hm = 295 + 515 Ceq
(18)
Hb = 223 + 147 Ceq
(19)
Hfp = 140 + 139 Ceq,
(20)
from which the average maximum HAZ hardness, Hmax, is calculated using the rule of mixtures:
Hmax = VmHm + VbHb + VfpHfp.
(21)

3. Results and discussion

The chart in figure 1 is constructed using axes of the material index Ceq (on a linear scale) and the
process index weld energy (on a logarithmic scale). It shows empirical composition ranges for steels
and ranges of weld energy for various processes, and can be used as a scoping tool in a preliminary
assessment of candidate materials and processes. However, no link is yet made between the indices.
The cooling curves commonly superimposed on CCT diagrams for steels are often labelled with
empirically-determined volume fractions of transformation products. Figure 2 shows model
predictions of the volume fractions of transformation products resulting from cooling curves that are
characterised by different values of t. The variation of hardness with cooling time for a given steel,
which may be calculated for a range of steel compositions using the methods described, is included
schematically. The chart summarises the volume fractions of austenite transformation products based
on the CCT diagram. It may be reconstructed for a different steel composition by using the models
described. The variation of phase transformation products and maximum HAZ hardness may be
assessed as a function of weld energy using this chart.
Figure 3 is constructed using the same axes as figure 1, scaled on the material axis for constructional
steels, and shows model-based predictions of microstructural development in the HAZ after welding.
The solid line bounds the region of martensite formation. Broken contours to the left of the boundary
refer to conditions that result in a given volume fraction of martensite in the HAZ. Contours

6th EEIGM International Conference on Advanced Materials Research

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 31 (2012) 012011

IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1757-899X/31/1/012011

describing given volume fractions of bainite and a ferrite-pearlite mixture (not shown) may be
constructed in a similar manner. By using a weldability criterion based on HAZ microstructure, e.g.
50% martensite, candidate combinations of welding parameters and steel composition may be assessed.
By using equations (2) and (5) the weld energy scale may be modified to take into account preheating
to a given temperature. The chart uses a material index and a process index to present solid state
transformations in the HAZ of constructional steels, and is similar to the Schaeffler diagram, which
shows weld metal microstructure in stainless steels following liquid-solid phase transformations using
two material indices.

Figure 3. Chart showing model-based microstructural development in the heat affected zone of
constructional steel welds. The axes are the process index (weld energy) and the material index (Ceq).
The solid boundary shows the lower limit of martensite formation. Broken contours indicate a given
volume fraction of martensite.
Figure 4 shows contours of constant maximum HAZ hardness, created using the model described for
compositions relevant to constructional steels, and plotted using the axes of figure 1. Literature
measurements of HAZ hardness adjacent to the fusion line (where the highest value is normally found)
obtained from welds made using the manual metal arc, metal inert gas, submerged arc and laser
processes [4, 8-10] are included. Experimental data are seen to agree well with the model-based
hardness contours. By using a weldability criterion based on a maximum permitted hardness, such as
that of 350 HV used in many branches of construction, an initial estimate of the welding parameters
for safe welding of a steel of given composition may be obtained from figure 3. Alternatively the
weldability of a range of steels within a given range of weld energy may be assessed rapidly.
Despite its simplicity, the material index Ceq appears to be a reliable measure of hardenability in
constructional steels (model-based hardness contours lie in correct relation to experimental data on the
y-axis of the chart). Similarly, the process index - weld energy input - appears to characterise the
thermal cycles experienced in the HAZ well (experimental data and model predictions lie correctly on
the chart x-axis).

6th EEIGM International Conference on Advanced Materials Research

IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 31 (2012) 012011

IOP Publishing
doi:10.1088/1757-899X/31/1/012011

Figure 4. Chart showing hardness development in the heat affected zone of constructional steel welds.
The axes are the process index (weld energy) and the material index (Ceq). Literature data for
maximum heat affected zone hardness in welds produced by laser beam (thin plate), metal inert gas,
tungsten inert gas and submerged arc (thick plate) processes are shown together with contours of

hardness calculated using the model.

4. Conclusions

The mathematical model used is a good predictor of the maximum hardness developed in the
HAZ of constructional steels for a range of welding processes and steels.
The charts are a user-friendly graphical display of the effects of variations in characteristic
material and process indices on hardness and hardenability in constructional steels.
The methods used provide a starting point to understand and model welding of steels currently
under development, such as ausferritic and carbide-free grades.

5.
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]

References
Ashby M F 2011 Materials Selection in Mechanical Design (Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann)
Ion J C, Ashby M F and Easterling K E 1984 Acta Met. 32 1949
Ion J C, Shercliff H R and Ashby M F 1992 Acta Met. Mater. 40 1539
Ion J C, Salminen A S and Sun Z 1996 Weld. J. 75 225s
Rosenthal D 1946 Trans. ASME 68 849
Johnson W A and Mehl R F 1939 Trans. Am. Inst. Min. Met. Eng. Iron Steel Div. 135 416
Inagaki M and Sekiguchi H 1960 Trans. Nat. Inst. Met. Japan 2 102
Albright C E, Hsu C and Lund R O 1991 Fatigue strength of laser-welded lap joints Proc. Laser
Materials Processing Conf. ICALEO 90 eds S L Ream, F Dausinger and T Fujioka (Orlando:
Laser Institute of America) pp 357-363
[9] Moore P L, Howse D S and Wallach E R 2003 Microstructure and properties of autogenous
high-power Nd:YAG laser welds in C-Mn steels Proc. 6th Int. Conf. Trends in Welding
Research eds S A David, T DebRoy, J C Lippold, H B Smartt and J M Vitek, (Pine Mountain, GA,
USA, 15-19 April 2002) (Materials Park: ASM International) pp 748-753
[10]
Ion J C 2005 Laser Processing of Engineering Materials (Oxford: Elsevier)