×
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

Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

(OP)
This is a material sourcing concern as you might have already guessed.
I need to know of any possible complications or incompatibilities between any two of these alloys when fabricated.
I am thinking of using 686 filler metal regardless of selection.
For example, do any require annealing after welding/forming?
.

"If you don't have time to do the job right the first time, when are you going to find time to repair it?"

RE: Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

Solution anneal is not required after welding, but after forming, yes for all of the alloys above for maximum corrosion resistance. By the way, I don't like interchangeable for these alloys because each is a different animal and responds differently to corrosive environments.

RE: Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

(OP)
I too don't like interchangeable if I can help it.
The service is crude overhead piping where C-276 is the recommended alloy.
It is exceeded in corrosion resistance by the others I listed in many applications; is that also true for this application?

"If you don't have time to do the job right the first time, when are you going to find time to repair it?"

RE: Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

BTW, I would strongly suggest you make time to visit the Haynes web site and Special Metals web site for all of the necessary technical information related to welding (DMW welding) and fabrication for the above alloys.

RE: Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

brimstoner;
You need more information to perform a proper material comparison. What is the operating temperature of the line, flow, corrosive species, acid or reducing environment, pH....? This is not something anyone on this forum can easily answer off the top of the head, nor would I risk such a off the cuff recommendation.

Do as I said, and visit the web sites and evaluate corrosion performance based on your stated service conditions.

RE: Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

One issue is that because C276 has been made as a generic for so long there is both good quality material and some very poor quality material out there.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Plymouth Tube

RE: Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

Depends: do you need the full corrosion resistance of a particular C grade, or is it just a service where 316 isn't good enough and C is the next tool that was handy? That's frequently the case, especially for instruments- middle resistance grades like super-duplexes or high Mo austenitics aren't offered. In that case, you don't get a choice. The vendor selects a grade and makes their units from that, and they give you only two options generally- 316 and whatever C grade or grades they choose to use. For coriolis meters for instance, that's ALWAYS C-22, not C-276, whether you like it or not. So in reality, unless your line consists ONLY of pipe and fittings, you're likely going to have a mixture of C grades.

Who says that C-276 is the recommended alloy, and on what basis do they say that? I've had clients who insisted on a particular grade but when we dug into it, we found out that they had been using devices for years made from other grades and hadn't even realized it. Corrosion and superstition often go hand in hand.

These grades do have different resistances to different corrodents, which again differ depending on product form and post fabrication treatments. But that is only meaningful for particular corrodents and when a particular alloy is specified. And as EdStainless says, there are some generic versions missing some important alloying constituents out there.

RE: Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

Up alloying of the weld filler metal is generally recommended. Whether the use of 686 is correct for all of your services and alloys stated is another story.

RE: Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

(OP)
mm,
I appreciate your comments, and I have not said what the service is - it is for a crude overhead line, where erosion-corrosion and the other usual suspects are issues. Droplet impingement corrosion is a specific problem. We are very aware the current MoC is very insufficient.

316 is definitely not an option; C-276 was recommended by an experienced corrosion consultant who has been active in NACE for many years.

I would definitely like to know what to watch out for when buying C-276 or other C alloy. Is it down to composition, processing, and/or country of origin?

p.s., knowing nothing about coriolis meters I had to google it. See if you can spot the error on page 3 of this brochure - https://www.honeywellprocess.com/library/support/P...

"If you don't have time to do the job right the first time, when are you going to find time to repair it?"

RE: Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

Hmm, looks like a confusion of 8s and 6s...

RE: Welded Hastelloy C-276, C-22, C-2000, Inconel 686 -- Freely Interchangeable?

And many people forget that the 6% Mo superaustenitics are a lot better than 316 and 2205, and not nearly as expensive as a Ni based alloy.

In my book the big factor in favor of the newer generation C alloys is that they have better microstructural stability, that is they are less likely to form detrimental secondary phases (such as in weld HAZ).

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Plymouth Tube

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