×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

Stainless/stainless welding E309L-16

Stainless/stainless welding E309L-16

Stainless/stainless welding E309L-16

(OP)
Hi guys,

I think this is the correct forum for this question, if not I apologize.  

History:
We had some pressure vessel welding done in shop from a state licensed welder who used weld rod E309L-16 to weld A182/316L stainless to A312/TP316L stainless.  The inspector that comes in to check the work says that E309L-16 is not acceptable and that the welder should have used E316L-16.  

My question is:  is E309L-16 not an acceptable weld rod to use.  I have searched online finding numerous articles saying it is okay to use.  Can someone help me verify this with a web link or ASME code.  I am looking into ASME B31.3 now.

Please Help!!!

RE: Stainless/stainless welding E309L-16

The Inspector is correct in flagging this filler metal. The 309 is formulated for welding 309 stainless steel to itself in wrought or cast form, Type 304 and for dissimilar metal welding between 304 to carbon steel. Review ASME Code Section II, Part C, SFA 5.4. E308L, E308MoL or E316L would have been suitable.

RE: Stainless/stainless welding E309L-16

While E309L is most capable of meeting the mechanical requirements (tensile strength and ductility) of 316L (though not at cryogenic temperature) for the involved joint, it does not provide similar corrosion resistance to 316L with regard to pitting, for which reason the 316L was no doubt selected.  

RE: Stainless/stainless welding E309L-16

(OP)
Does it say in the code that you specifically can not use E309L-16 for this joint.  I am trying to find a "free" article on ASME IIC, probably not going to happen though.

thanks.

RE: Stainless/stainless welding E309L-16

Here is the issue, you need to review the contract or engineering specification requirments for this project to determine if a specific filler metal was required. My guess is that the welder had made a mistake by selecting 309 rod regardless if it can meet mechanical property requirements.

If the engineering specification for this project specified 316L or equivalent you have a nonconformance and this means remove the filler metal. If there was no specification for filler metal, you can leave it but I would discuss this with the Purchaser. If it was me, I would tell you to remove it. A vessel that is constructed of 316L stainless is not for aesthetic purposes!

 

RE: Stainless/stainless welding E309L-16

What did the WPS specify? If the WPS specified E316L to be used when joining 316L SS, the weld is nonconforming and the welder erred. It should never be the welder's perrogitive to choose the welding filler on his/her own initiative. Since this is a pressure vessel subject to ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, the manufacturer must comply with its Code Quality Manual, which I am sure would require controls on WPS and weld filler metal issuance.

Did the manufacturer violate its Code Manual?  If so write a nonconformance report and obtain the Owner/Engineer's acceptance of a use as is disposition.  

RE: Stainless/stainless welding E309L-16

stanweld;
The WPS for P-No 8 base material does not need to specifically identify a filler metal composition, it can be E3XX.

RE: Stainless/stainless welding E309L-16

I fully understand that A-analysis is the governing essential variable and that the use of E309 would meet Code requirements for the joint; however, most of the vessel manufacturer's welding procedures (and I have reviewed thousands of them in the past 35 years) specify the use of E316 for welding type 316 ss, E308 for type 304, E347 for 321 ss & 347 ss, etc.; in which case the weld is still nonconforming to the WPS even though the WPS conforms with ASME IX with regard to the essential variables.  

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources