Engineering Research Institute University of Michigan A.nn Arbor Report on EXAMINATION OF SAMPLE 14R FROM THE RICHMOND STATION FOR GRAPHITIZATION 39, 253 HOURS AFTER. SOLUTION TREATMENT Written by: Approved by: J. W. Freeman A. E. White Project Number M532-3 December 1, 1953 Report Number 71

EXAMINATION OF SAMPLE 14R FROM THE RICHMOND STATION FOR GRAPHITIZATION 39, 253 HOURS AFTER SOLUTION TREATMENT A weld-prober sample from the Richmond Station of the Philadelphia Electric Company was examined for the reappearance of graphite during service after solution treatment. The sample was marked 14R and had been in service 39,253 hours after the solution treatment. FINDINGS No graphite was found in Sample 14R by metallographic examination. No residue or microscopic holes remaining from graphite solution were observed on either side of the weld. This, together with the general structure, suggested that the weld from which Sample 14R was taken had not been severely graphitized prior to solution treatment. DESCRIPTION OF SAMPLE 14R Sample 14R was removed from a weld in the main steam piping from Number 65 Boiler of the Richmond Station of the Philadelphia Electric Company. It was taken October 20, 1953, when the total service time was 39, 253 hours. The weld sampled was not identified further than to state that it was a different weld than that sampled for examination after 31,952 hours, as described in Report Number 65.

C/iq

2 RESULTS Plate 1 shows the macrostructure of the weld-prober sample. There was no evidence of graphitizationo Plate 2 shows the microstructure typical of both sides of the weld at the location of the outside edge of the heat-affected zone developed during the original welding. There was no evidence of graphitization. No graphite was observed in pipe metal or weld-deposited metal, Previous examinations of welds from the Richmond Station had shown that a residue or microscopic hole effect remained after graphite solution, when graphitization had been fairly extensive. Such effects were found in the sample examined for Report Number 65, which had been in service 31,952 hours after solution treatment. There was, however, no evidence of regraphitization at that time. The present examination of Sample 14R did not show the residue or hole effects. Furthermore, the somewhat larger grains of ferrite and pearlite characteristics of the location of graphite prior to solution treatment were absent. (See Report Number 65.) It is, therefore, presumed that graphitization was not very extensive prior to solution treatment.

X0l Plate 1 - Macrostructure of Weld-Prober Sample 14-R

-,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o'.. )I',','.-.~ 4'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~' ".'~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~L,,..',:..l'-.,;:.?:k.,:-,%~..-'.,,. -': r?-,:..T':;,,';:;-";,..:,,.',: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~r 0,T ~ t3 00 X00 4~~~~~~~ p,. ~,+.-,~~..~~.;h.~ 4,~:.,...'.''2:."' S.- ~ ~ A an' 4 V~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~4. C~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 16 -C - 7 A..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~0 Plate 2 Microstructure of Weld-Prober Sample l14 —R at the Location of the Outside l~~~~~~~~~~dge.., of?: Hea-Affe ted Zone. of the,,r Weld before:~~.:'~,:;i~:.~'.:::.::': Solution Treatment.

UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN 3 9015 I02826 5299l l l I3 915 I 529 9 I 1 3 9015 02826 5299