Abstract High Strength Low Alloy steels (HSLA) for oil and gas pipelines should display high mechanical strength, toughness, ductility and weldability. In this work we studied the influence of quenching and tempering temperature on the yield strength, ultimate tensile strength, percent elongation and hardness of API 5L steel pipes in order to optimize heat treatments to be performed after hot induction bending of the material. The thermal cycles involved soaking temperatures of 880, 920 and 960 °C, cooling water at 15, 23 and 31 °C and tempering at 530, 600 and 670 °C. From this, experimental design techniques were used to reduce the number of experiments. The results from contour maps suggest that soaking temperatures of 910 and 950 °C and tempering between 540 and 610 °C were the most suitable for treatment, regarding mechanical strength. The variation of the water temperature was not significant for the assumed cooling conditions. The prediction regression models of the mechanical properties from the variables involved in the heat treatments showed a good fit between the experimental and predicted results, with correlation coefficient between 0.89 and 0.94.

The API 5L X70 steel is used in high-pressure gas transmission pipelines. Because of this, knowledge of presence of residual stress and their magnitude is important to assess the material integrity in service. For the pipeline manufacturing, tubes need to be curved which is often made using the hot induction bending process. This process can introduce different residual stress depending of tube position. For this research, in order to evaluate the residual stress, was used an API 5L X70 tube that was previously curved by hot induction process. Samples were taken from the extrados, intrados, neutral line and straight section of the curved tube. Residual stresses were studied by two conventional methods: X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) and Hole-Drilling, which are destructive and non-destructive methods, respectively, in order to assess their qualitative responses. Each of these methods presents particular methodologies in sample preparation and material analysis, but also they differ in factors such time consumption and cost of the analysis. The qualitative responses obtained by the two different methods were comparable and satisfactory and pointed out the existence of a compressive residual stress state in steel pipe.