Materials and Design 32 (2011) 831–837

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matdes

Characterization of microstructure, mechanical properties and corrosion

resistance of dissimilar welded joint between 2205 duplex stainless steel
and 16MnR
Shaogang Wang *, Qihui Ma, Yan Li
College of Material Science and Technology, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The joint of dissimilar metals between 2205 duplex stainless steel and 16MnR low alloy high strength
Received 23 March 2010 steel are welded by tungsten inert gas arc welding (GTAW) and shielded metal arc welding (SMAW)
Accepted 10 July 2010 respectively. The microstructures of welded joints are investigated using scanning electron microscope,
Available online 16 July 2010
optical microscope and transmission electron microscopy respectively. The relationship between
mechanical properties, corrosion resistance and microstructure of welded joints is evaluated. Results
Keywords: indicate that there are a decarburized layer and an unmixed zone close to the fusion line. It is also indi-
A. Ferrous metals and alloys
cated that, austenite and acicular ferrite structures distribute uniformly in the weld metal, which is
D. Welding
F. Microstructure
advantageous for better toughness and ductility of joints. Mechanical properties of joints welded by
the two kinds of welding technology are satisfied. However, the corrosion resistance of the weldment
produced by GTAW is superior to that by SMAW in chloride solution. Based on the present work, it is con-
cluded that GTAW is the suitable welding procedure for joining dissimilar metals between 2205 duplex
stainless steel and 16MnR.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction to great decrease of properties of the welded joint. There are some
researches about failure analysis or mechanical performance for
Duplex stainless steel (DSS) consists of approximately equal dissimilar metals joints. Ul-Hamid et al. [4] have addressed that
amounts of austenite and ferrite, which results in the favorable carbon diffusion in the dissimilar joint between carbon steel pipe
mechanical properties and corrosion resistance. The higher and type 304 stainless steel elbows resulted in cracking after a rel-
strength properties allow weight savings, which reduce fabrication atively short period of usage. Lee et al. [5] have also reported
costs and enable lighter support structures to be used. The higher creep–fatigue damage of dissimilar weldment of modified 9Cr–
corrosion resistance, in particular against stress corrosion cracking, 1Mo steel (ASME Grade 91) and 316L stainless steel in a liquid me-
makes them preferably applied in certain environments such as tal reactor. In order to overcome the technical problems and take
chemical tankers, pressure vessels, pipes to heat exchangers, paper full advantage of the properties of different metals, it is necessary
machines and ocean engineering [1–3]. With the growing applica- to pay more attention to the joining of dissimilar metals, so as to
tion of new materials and higher requirements for materials, a produce high quality welded joints between them.
great need occurs for component or structure of dissimilar metals. At present, some investigations have been conducted on weld-
However, the joining of dissimilar metals is generally more chal- ing of duplex stainless steel, almost all common fusion welding
lenging than that of similar metals, which is usually due to several techniques can be used to weld duplex stainless steel through
factors such as the differences in chemical compositions and ther- selecting appropriate filler metals and parameters such as heat in-
mal expansion coefficients, resulting in different residual stresses put [6,7]. Explosive welding can be thought as a feasible method to
situation across the different regions of weldments as well as the produce composite plates. Kaçar and Acarer [8] have addressed
migration of carbon element from the steel with higher carbon that explosive welding process can be used successfully for clad-
content to the steel with relatively lower carbon content. If the ding duplex stainless steel on the vessel steels without losing prop-
welding process is not well controlled, some weld defects such erties such as corrosion resistance and mechanical properties.
as dilutions and cracks will generate in the weld metal and lead However, compared to the welding of similar metals, there is lim-
ited information about microstructure/property relationships in
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 025 52112901; fax: +86 025 52112626. dissimilar material welds between duplex stainless steel and low
E-mail address: sgwang@nuaa.edu.cn (S.G. Wang). alloy high strength steel. Increasing application of these steels will

0261-3069/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2010.07.012
832 S.G. Wang et al. / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 831–837

Table 1
Chemical compositions of base metals and filler metals (wt.%).

Elements C Mn P S Si Cr Ni Mo N
Base metal SAF2205 0.016 0.82 0.024 0.001 0.36 22.48 5.46 3.12 0.16
16MnR 0.15 1.38 0.016 0.014 0.32 – – – –
Filler metal ER2209 0.013 1.54 0.018 0.007 0.49 22.92 8.61 3.18 0.17
E2209 0.026 0.90 0.025 0.002 0.90 22.10 10.00 2.84 0.18

require a better understanding of the mechanics associated with 3. Results and discussion
welding of dissimilar metals. Since GTAW and SMAW are widely
employed in engineering application, in the current work, a few at- 3.1. Microstructure of welded joints
tempts have been made to produce dissimilar material welded
joint between DSS and low alloy high strength steel. At the same The preparation of microstructure samples of dissimilar metals
time, some results are presented as reference for the practical joint is much difficult. Therefore, special operation procedure
welding of these types of dissimilar metals. should be used. Both of the weld metal (WM) and 2205 base metal
are etched by aqua-regia. However, the bonding region at the side
2. Experimental material and procedure of 16MnR is etched by 5% nital solution alone, and 16MnR base me-
tal should be prevented from being etched by aqua-regia. The
The base metals employed in this presentation are duplex stain- interfacial microstructure of 16MnR–WM is shown in Fig. 2. It is
less steel 2205 and low alloy high strength steel 16MnR. The chem- a region with about 30 lm width near the fusion line. The existing
ical compositions of base metals and filler metals are given in of this region can be attributed to the thermal conductivity of the
Table 1. The base metals are machined to the dimension of duplex stainless steel (at 20 °C, 17 W m1 K1), which is lower than
300 mm  150 mm  8 mm, a single V groove is prepared with that of 16MnR (at 20 °C, 48 W m1 K1) [8]. The region near the fu-
an angle of 60°. The schematic of welded joint is shown in Fig. 1. sion boundary often differs significantly from the bulk weld metal
The joints are carried out in two different types of welding process in composition and sometimes even in microstructure and proper-
respectively, which are GTAW with ER2209 welding wire and ties. This region can further be divided into several different parts,
SMAW with E2209 electrode. According to the analyses of experi- i.e., the unmixed zone, filler-metal-depleted zone, partially mixed
ment results, the optimized welding parameters are summarized zone, intermediate mixed zone, and hardening zone, as described
in Table 2. in Refs. [9,10]. The microstructure of GTAW joint and SMAW joint
After welding, a series of properties tests and microanalyses on are shown in Fig. 2a and b respectively. The unmixed zone exists as
joints are conducted. The mechanical properties tests of welded an unetched layer seen in Fig. 2, where a small portion of the base
joints include tensile test, Vickers hardness and Charpy ‘V’ notch
impact test. Impact tests are performed with sub-size specimens
(55 mm  10 mm  5 mm) at room temperature. The microstruc-
ture characterizations of the dissimilar joints are analyzed using
optical microscopy (OM), scanning electron microscopy (SEM)
and transmission electron microscopy (TEM), together with X-ray
diffractometer (XRD) respectively. The pitting corrosion resistance
of welded joints and 2205 base metal is evaluated in solution of
3.5% NaCl at room temperature. The electrochemical corrosion test
is conducted in a conventional three-electrode cell by using a Pt
foil as the auxiliary electrode and a saturated calomel electrode
as the reference one.

Fig. 1. Schematic of the dissimilar metal joint.

Table 2
Welding parameters.

Welded Welding Filler Welding Welding Welding speed

joint process metal current (A) voltage (V) (cm min1)
A GTAW ER2209 110–130 12–14 10–12
B SMAW E2209 140–160 22–24 6–8 Fig. 2. Microstructure of 16MnR–WM interface: (a) GTAW joint and (b) SMAW
joint.
 S.G. Wang et al. / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 831–837 833

metal has completely melted and recrystallized without undergo-

ing the dilution of filler metal. In addition, there is a white layer
at the left side of fusion line, which is called decarburization layer
due to the decomposition of pearlite. From Fig. 2, it is simulta-
neously indicated that the decarburization layer of SMAW joint is
wider than that of GTAW joint. The reason is probably associated
with input energy (H). Input energy is usually defined as the pro-
portion of heat input per unit of the workpiece, the value can be
expressed as Eq. (1), where I – welding current (A), U – welding
voltage (V), v – welding speed (m s1), heat efficiency coefficient
g = 0.75–0.80. According to Table 2, the heat input of SMAW is
higher than that of GTAW. As a result, the increase of H generally
leads to increase the migration of carbon element in the joint.

H ¼ g I U=m ð1Þ
EDS line scanning is performed at the 16MnR–WM interface of
two welded joints, as shown in Fig. 3. From Fig. 3, the variations in
Cr, Ni content decrease gradually. They present evident gradient
variation near the fusion zone, and the content of Cr varies more
greatly than that of Ni. The concentration gradient, the thermal cy-
cles experienced during welding, and the weld metal being richer
in Cr would promote the diffusion of carbon from 16MnR side into
the weld metal [11]. The carbon migration from carbon steel to
high alloy steel or stainless steel during welding have also been re-
ported in Refs. [12,13]. The dilution of 16MnR and fast cooling of
molten pool lead to the alloying element concentrating near the fu-
sion line, and some chromium carbides or martensites are induced
easily. As a result, the unmixed zone is produced.
In order to further understand the morphology of the unmixed
zone, the microstructure of the weld metal near the fusion zone is
observed. The TEM image of GTAW joint is shown in Fig. 4a. Ferrite
and a small amount of needle-like carbides are observed in the re-
gion of joint, which indicates that the needle-like carbides are Fe3C
based on the electron diffraction pattern, as shown in Fig. 4b.

Fig. 3. EDS line scanning across the 16MnR–WM interface: (a) GTAW joint and (b) Fig. 4. TEM photos of the GTAW joint transition region: (a) microstructure of weld
SMAW joint. metal, (b) SAED pattern, (c) short rod-like carbides and (d) island-like carbides.
834 S.G. Wang et al. / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 831–837

Moreover, some short rod-like carbides, granular carbides and is- improving joint crack resistance and reducing the inhomogeneous
land-like carbides are observed at higher amplification electron distribution of weld structure during multi-pass welding.
microscope, as shown in Fig. 4c and d respectively. However, the Generally, the formation of martensite, M23C6 (chromium car-
result shows that no carbides such as M23C6 or martensite are ob- bide), Cr2N and r phase depends on the base materials joined
served in the unmixed zone. Therefore, it can be concluded that the and welding conditions according to Refs. [15,16]. Therefore, X-
development of such a morphology is attributed to decomposition ray diffraction analysis is carried out on the weld metal and the re-
of pearlite at 16MnR side and formation of Fe3C at the WM side. sults are shown in Fig. 7. There are only a and c phases in both of
The decomposition model is shown in Fig. 5. the weld metals, and no precipitation of M23C6 (chromium car-
The optical micrograph of weld metal is shown in Fig. 6. From bide), Cr2N or r phase is found in the weld metal, which is advan-
Fig. 6, the morphology of acicular ferrite in austenite matrix has tageous to mechanical properties and corrosion resistance of the
been observed, which is characterized by large amount of austen- joint.
ite. However, in terms of ferrite content in the joint, there is not
much variation between the two weld metals in welded joints A
and B, and the ferrite volume fraction is only 17.3% and 14.5% (ob- 3.2. Mechanical properties
tained by point counting method) respectively. The large amount
of austenite is attributed to chemical composition in filler metals Results of tensile tests of welded joints are shown in Table 3,
– mainly the Ni element content [12,14]. As a result, the massive and the average tensile strengths of the two welded joints are
austenite in weld metal can decrease the precipitation of brittle ni- 582.4 MPa, 564.6 MPa respectively. Both of them are higher than
tride phase, which is beneficial to the ductile, toughness and corro- that of base metal, which indicates that the tensile strength of
sion resistance of welded joint. Consequently, it is advantageous to two kinds of welded joints is satisfactory. Although the fracture po-
sition of B specimen is at the HAZ of 16MnR, its average tensile
strength still reaches 564.6 MPa, which is almost the same as that
of 16MnR base metal (580.8 MPa). So its strength meets the
requirements of engineering application.

Fig. 5. Schematic of reaction model at 16MnR/WM interface.

Fig. 7. XRD curves of the weld metal: (a) GTAW joint and (b) SMAW joint.

Table 3
Ultimate tensile strength of welded joints.

Samples rb (MPa) d (%) Fracture position

2205 BM 830.4 29.8 –
16MnR BM 580.8 18.9 –
A 582.4 21.5 16MnR BM
B 564.6 21.8 16MnR HAZ
Fig. 6. Microstructure of weld metal: (a) GTAW joint and (b) SMAW joint.
 S.G. Wang et al. / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 831–837 835

Fig. 8. Charpy impact test results of welded joints.

The impact toughness values of base metal, HAZ of 16MnR and

two weld metals are tested at room temperature respectively, as
presented in Fig. 8. Because the HAZ at the side of DSS is very nar-
row, confining to only about 200–400 lm, no attempt is made to
assess its impact toughness. The data in Fig. 8 suggest that the im-
pact toughness of both weld metals A and B is higher than that of
the 16MnR HAZ and similar to that of the 16MnR base metal.
Although the austenite content in weld metal is more than the
one in the DSS base metal, its impact toughness is still lower than
that of DSS base metal. The possible reason is that DSS structure
consists approximately of equal amounts of austenite and ferrite,
which is beneficial to biphase grains for its uniform distribution,
smooth phase boundary, better resistance to crack propagation,
etc.
Further analysis indicates that the impact toughness of sample
B is slightly higher than that of sample A in weld metal, which is
associated with welding heat input. SMAW has a greater heat input
compared to GTAW, which results in a slower cooling rate. The fer-
rite–austenite transformation in this region occurs partially during
solidification with the action of weld thermal cycles, because there
is sufficient time for the diffusion of alloying element chromium
throughout the ferrite phase [17,18]. As a result, the ferrite-to-aus-
tenite transformation ratio decreases as a function of increased
heat input, more austenite phase is generated in sample B during
welding.
The scanning electron fractographs of base metals/16MnR and
HAZ/weld metal of impact samples are shown in Fig. 9. The weld
metal presents a mode of ductile fracture, revealing a parabola
dimple structure. Furthermore, the dimension of dimples is finer
in the weld metal B compared to that of sample A, while the dim-
ples distribution of sample A is more evenly than that of sample B,
as shown in Fig. 9a and c respectively. The formation of this frac-
ture morphology is due to its fine austenite grain and smooth aus-
tenite/ferrite phase boundary, thus good impact toughness of
welded joints is obtained. The fractographs of 16MnR HAZ of two
different joints are shown in Fig. 9b and d respectively. From
Fig. 9b, it can be observed that there are many equiaxed dimples,
so the fracture mode in 16MnR HAZ is ductile. But fracture in Fig. 9. Fracture morphology of Charpy impact samples: (a) weld metal A, (b)
16MnR HAZ of B specimen is mainly river-like pattern of the qua- 16MnR HAZ A, (c) weld metal B and (d) 16MnR HAZ B.
si-cleavage fracture, as shown in Fig. 9d.
Microhardness profile across the joint interface is shown in
Fig. 10. The microhardness distributions of two kinds of welded hardness values of the two joint interface are approximately
joints are almost the same. Obviously, the hardness value of weld 224 HV and 220 HV respectively. It is because the carbon element
metal is higher than that of the 16MnR base metal and the migrates from the 16MnR side to weld metal during welding due
16MnR HAZ. With the distance increasing away from interface, to the difference of chemical compositions between 16MnR and
the microhardness values vary to a certain extent. The highest weld metal. Similar result is reported by Kaçar and Acarer [8],
836 S.G. Wang et al. / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 831–837

Table 4
Electrochemical parameters of DSS BM and weld metals.

Samples Joint A Joint B DSS BM

Corrosion potential/Ecorr (V) 0.394 0.463 0.251
Corrosion current/Icorr (A) 0.2932 0.3041 0.2862

Fig. 10. Hardness curves of 16MnR–WM interface.

who studied the explosively welded joint between DSS and carbon
steel.

3.3. Corrosion behavior

In order to evaluate the corrosion resistance of weld metal,

Fig. 13. SEM micrograph of pitting corrosion.
sample is sealed with A/B glue, leaving about 10 mm  10 mm test
area, 3.5% NaCl solution is used as corrosion solution, the sche-
matic diagram is shown in Fig. 11. In general, the higher the value is, the better corrosion resistance
Electrochemical corrosion test results of 2205 DSS base metal of the material is. Therefore, in 3.5% NaCl solution, corrosion resis-
and weld metal are shown in Fig. 12 and Table 4 respectively. tance order of the samples is: 2205 DSS BM > joint A > joint B.
These samples display more or less similar behaviors in terms of The pitting corrosion resistance of the DSS BM is much better
corrosion current (about 0.3 A). But their corrosion potentials are compared to the two weld metals, as can be seen from the polari-
slightly different, the ranking is: joint B < joint A < 2205 DSS. Corro- zation plot. The DSS BM sample does not display any corrosion in
sion potential is a static indicator of electrochemical corrosion 3.5% NaCl solution and there is no pit in the sample examined after
resistance, which reveals susceptibility to corrosion of material. the potentiodynamic cyclic scanning. And the good pitting resis-
tance behaviors of weld metal are attributed to the addition of
Cr, Ni, elements [19]. The alloying element Cr could improve the
stability of passive films, and the Ni would decrease the overall dis-
solution rates of Fe and Cr [20]. Moreover, the heat input of joint A
is different from that of joint B, which affects the weld microstruc-
ture and results in the difference of formation condition of metal
surface passive film. Generally, the finer the grain is, the more eas-
ily the compact passive film forms. As a result, the corrosive ions
cannot readily diffuse through the passive film and the metal pre-
sents better corrosion resistance, so the joint A has better corrosion
resistance compared to joint B.
When welded joint is etched in chloride solution, defects gener-
Fig. 11. Schematic diagram of electrochemical sample.
ated in the welding process (such as welding spatter or inclusion)
possibly make it lose its ability to protect the surface passive film.
As a result, a chromium-depleted zone appears around weld metal,
which makes the surface activated, and the joint presents an ac-
tive–passive behavior. The initiation sites for the pits are located
at the ferrite–austenite grain boundaries and once formed they
rapidly propagate from ferrite to austenite, as described in Ref.
[21]. It can be seen from Fig. 13 that ferrite grains are etched, leav-
ing lots of grooves at the ferrite–austenite grain boundaries, and
the remaining white strips are austenite. This selective localized
corrosion is attributed to difference of the electrochemical poten-
tial, caused by the ratio of biphase in weld metal. It is concluded
that the austenite grains are by far more resistant to the chloride
environment than that of the ferrite grains.

4. Conclusions

The investigation of welding between 2205 DSS and 16MnR by

Fig. 12. Polarization curves of DSS BM and weld metals. GTAW and SMAW respectively reach the following conclusions:
 S.G. Wang et al. / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 831–837 837

Attribute to decomposition of pearlite at 16MnR side and for- [6] Ureña A, Otero E, Utrilla MV, Munez CJ. Weldability of a 2205 duplex stainless
steel using plasma arc welding. J Mater Process Technol 2007;182:624–31.
mation of Fe3C at the WM side, a decarburization layer and an un-
[7] Muthupandi V, Bala Srinivasan P, Seshadri SK, Sundaresan S. Effect of weld
mixed zone are observed at the interface of 16MnR/WM. metal chemistry and heat input on the structure and properties of duplex
The microstructure of weld metal consists of austenite and acic- stainless steel welds. Mater Sci Eng A 2003;358:9–16.
ular ferrite, and both of the two kinds of joints are characterized by [8] Kaçar R, Acarer M. Microstructure–property relationship in explosively welded
duplex stainless steel–steel. Mater Sci Eng A 2003;363:290–6.
a high content of austenite, which is beneficial to mechanical prop- [9] Naffakh H, Shamanian M, Ashrafizadeh F. Dissimilar welding of AISI 310
erties and corrosion resistance. Sigma phase or M23C6 intermetallic austenitic stainless to nickel-based alloy Inconel 657. J Mater Process Technol
compounds are not observed in current case through analysis of 2009;209:3628–39.
[10] Sireesha M, Shankar V, Albert SK, Sundaresan S. Microstructural features of
XRD. dissimilar welds between 316LN austenitic stainless steel and alloy 800. Mater
The impact toughness of the weld metal is similar to that of Sci Eng A 2000;292:74–82.
16MnR, but it is much higher than that of 16MnR HAZ. The weld [11] Srinivasan PB, Muthupandi V, Dietzel W, Sivan V. Microstructure and corrosion
behavior of shielded metal arc-welded dissimilar joints comprising duplex
metal and 16MnR HAZ welded by GTAW present a ductile mode stainless steel and low alloy steel. J Mater Eng Perform 2006;15:758–64.
of fracture, while the pattern of 16MnR HAZ welded by SMAW be- [12] Srinivasan PB, Muthupandi V, Dietzel W, Sivan V. An assessment of impact
longs to quasi-cleavage fracture. strength and corrosion behaviour of shielded metal arc welded dissimilar
weldments between UNS 31803 and IS 2062 steels. Mater Des
The fracture of the joint welded by GTAW occurs in the zone of 2006;27:182–91.
16MnR base metal, while the fracture position of the joint welded [13] You YY, Shiue RK, Shiue RH, Chen C. The study of carbon migration in
by SMAW is in 16MnR HAZ. However, the average tensile strength dissimilar welding of the modified 9Cr–1Mo steel. J Mater Sci Lett
2001;20:1429–32.
of welded joints is 582.4 MPa, 564.6 MPa respectively. Both of
[14] Migiakis K, Papadimitriou GD. Effect of nitrogen and nickel on the
them can meet the tensile strength requirements of engineering microstructure and mechanical properties of plasma welded UNS S32760
structure. super-duplex stainless steels. J Mater Sci 2009;44:6372–83.
The joint produced by SMAW has higher susceptibility to pitting [15] McPherson NA, Chi K, Mclean MS, Baker TN. Structure and properties of carbon
steel to duplex stainless steel submerged arc welds. Mater Sci Technol
corrosion in chloride solution than that of weldment produced by 2003;19:219–26.
GTAW. [16] Rajeev R, Samajdar I, Raman R, Harendranath CS, Kale GB. Origin of hard and
Based on the present work, it is summarized that GTAW with soft zone formation during cladding of austenitic/duplex stainless steel on
plain carbon steel. Mater Sci Technol 2001;17:1005–11.
filler metal ER2209 is the suitable welding procedure for dissimilar [17] Badji R, Bouabdallah M, Bacroix B, Kahloun C, Belkessa B, Maza H. Phase
metals joining between 2205 duplex stainless steel and 16MnR in transformation and mechanical behavior in annealed 2205 duplex stainless
the practical application. steel welds. Mater Charact 2008;59:447–53.
[18] Palmer TA, Elmer JW, Babu SS. Observations of ferrite/austenite
transformations in the heat affected zone of 2205 duplex stainless steel spot
References welds using time resolved X-ray diffraction. Mater Sci Eng A
2004;374:307–21.
[1] Sieurin H, Sandström R. Austenite reformation in the heat-affected zone of [19] Tavares SSM, Pardal JM, Lima LD, Bastos IN, Nascimento AM, de Souza JA.
duplex stainless steel 2205. Mater Sci Eng A 2006;418:250–6. Characterization of microstructure, chemical composition, corrosion
[2] Olsson J, Snis M. Duplex – A new generation of stainless steels for desalination resistance and toughness of a multipass weld joint of superduplex stainless
plants. Desalination 2007;205:104–13. steel UNS S32750. Mater Charact 2007;58:610–6.
[3] Kurt B. The interface morphology of diffusion bonded dissimilar stainless steel [20] Olsson C-OA, Landolt D. Passive films on stainless steels-chemistry, structure
and medium carbon steel couples. J Mater Process Technol 2007;190:138–41. and growth. Electrochim Acta 2003;48:1093–104.
[4] Ul-Hamid A, Tawancy HM, Abbas NM. Failure of weld joints between carbon [21] Kordatos JD, Fourlaris G, Papadimitriou G. The effect of cooling rate on the
steel pipe and 304 stainless steel elbows. Eng Fail Anal 2005;12:181–91. mechanical and corrosion properties of SAF 2205(UNS 31803) duplex stainless
[5] Lee HY, Lee SH, Kim JB, Lee JH. Creep–fatigue damage for a structure with steel welds. Scripta Mater 2001;44:401–8.
dissimilar metal welds of modified 9Cr–1Mo steel and 316L stainless steel. Int J
Fatigue 2007;29:1868–79.