The effects of non-isothermal

deformation on martensitic
transformation

Seminar – SS 08

Alireza S. Akbari
Institut für Eisenhüttenkunde
RWTH Aachen
 Contents

 Introduction and goals of the project

 Experimental procedure

 Results and discussion

 Conclusions

 Hints for future works

Introduction
and
background
Introduction

Hot stamping process

 non-isothermal deformation

 high-temperature forming

 UHSS parts

 no spring back
 combining forming and
phase transformations
Introduction

Hot stamping steps

 austenitization of steel sheets

 simultaneous forming and quenching

Introduction

Hot stamping applications

1. door beam 4. A-/B- pillar reinforcement

2. bumper beam

5. waist rail reinforcement

3. cross and side members
Introduction

Hot stamping and boron steels

 low alloying content lower costs
 good formability

 boron strong hardening agent

addition of 30ppm boron is equivalent to:

0.6% Mn or,
0.7% Cr or,
0.5% Mo or,
1.5% Ni.
 UTS of more than 1500MPa
Yield stress of more than 1100MPa
Introduction

Hot stamping and boron steels

Introduction

Goals of the Project…

 Mechanical Simulation of Hot Stamping
Process using Dilatation Experiments

 Adjustment of the Process Parameters to

Achieve Higher Strengths through Higher
Fractions of Martensite

 Development of Surface Hardness Mapping

for the Evaluation of Heterogeneous
Microstructures (Compression Specimens)
Experimental
Procedure
Experimental

Material
 22MnB5 steel
 Industrially processed hot-rolled steel plates
 Thickness of 10mm
 As delivered microstructure: 78% ferrite + 22% pearlite
Experimental

CCT diagram designation

 Dilatation Tests

 Hardness Tests

 Metallography

 Austenitization

at 900°C for 5min.

 Heating up Rate

5°C/sec.

Ms = 410°C Mf = 230°C
Experimental

Thermo-mechanical experiments
 Baehr 805 dilatometer
 Simple uniaxial compression
 Austenitizing at 900°C
 Simultaneous forming and quenching
at 600-850°C, strain rates 0.05-1.0s-1
 Cooling rate
50°C/sec. 0,3mm±0,1mm

10,0mm±0,1mm
4,0mm±0,1mm 0,3mm±0,1mm
5,0mm±0,1mm
Experimental

Thermo-mechanical experiments
Experimental

Surface hardness mapping

100% Martensitic 50% Martensitic

Maximum strain: -0.1, Strain rate: 0.05s-1, Initial def. temp. 750°C
Experimental

Surface hardness mapping

Experimental

Surface hardness mapping

 Indenter with 0.8g force

 Scanning with 0.3mm

steps
 The compression
specimens were cut
lengthwise and mounted
Experimental

Martensite fraction

100% M 50% M

Maximum strain: -0.1 Maximum strain: -0.15

Experimental

Dilatation vs. Hardness Mapping Data

 Results
and
Discussions
Results and Discussion

Austenitization soaking-time effect

 Lath shaped martensite

transformation  grain boundary
 Nucleation argument
(finer grain size, higher Ms,
easier nucleation)
 Longer soaking time 
coarser austenite grains 
lower Ms
Results and Discussion

Austenitization soaking-time effect

 2-6% difference
between dilatation
and hardness
mapping data
Results and Discussion

Initial deformation temperature effect

 Decreasing the temperature during transfer of blanks

 Investigation of deformation temperature at 50°C intervals
 Higher austenite deformation temp.  lowering plastic strain effect
 lowering mechanical stabilization
 higher fraction of martensite
Results and Discussion

Initial deformation temperature effect

Results and Discussion

Amount of strain

 Constant cooling rate  higher strain  lower temperature

 lower temperature  higher B and F

 change of slope after strain of -0.4

 Results and Discussion

Amount of strain
 Increasing the deformation

Lowering Ms Lowering M%

 coordinated movement of atoms

Strong defects Less drastic defects

like GBs like isolated dislocations

cannot be sustained
hindering and blockage
(driving force and fraction)
Results and Discussion

Amount of strain
 Ms  function of carbon content
 bainite and ferrite formation  increasing carbon content in the
vicinity
 increasing carbon content  increasing the required driving force
 decreasing Ms

Strain = -0.3
92% bainite – 8% martensite
Results and Discussion

Strain rate effect

 higher strain rate + constant cooling rate  higher temp.

 lower strain rate + constant cooling rate  bainitic trans.

 martensite vol. fraction Mechanical stabilization

(dislocations)

Shift of ‘B’ and ‘F’ zones

Temp. at the end of Def. to the left
Results and Discussion

Strain rate effect

 increasing strain rate:
below 700°C  dominant temp. effect
 hindering bainitic trans.

Higher 700°C  mech. stablization

 hindering martens. trans.

Decreasing the ability for martens. trans.

Higher required driving force + lower Ms

 Results and Discussion

Cooling rate effect

 Higher CR  Lower Temp.  Higher strength

 Higher Mech. Stab.
 Higher required driv. force
 Lower Ms
 Higher CR in non-isothermal def.  more dislocations
 retarding martens. trans.
 enhancing thermally
activated trans.
Results and Discussion

Cooling rate effect

 CCT diagram  higher CR  higher M% 

 DCCT diagram  higher CR  in case of continuation of def. to lower temps.

enhancing the possibility of bainitic transformation

Thus, during non-isothermal def. the optimum cooling rates must be employed
to avoid accelerating the ferritic/bainitic transformations.
Results and Discussion

Applied force effect

 Force  the most common parameter to be controlled in the industrial

hot stamping process
 Higher force  more dislocation density  more required driving force
 lower Ms
Results and Discussion

Applied force effect

 Force in the elastic region  accelerates ‘B’ and
‘M’ trans.

 is added to the driving

force for transformation

 lower force levels  more successful ‘M’ trans.

 higher force levels  more ‘B’ trans.

 higher force levels  shifts ‘B’ region to the left in CCT  more ‘B’
 shifts phase regions to lower temps.  lowering Ms

Although the reason is not completely clear, there is a minimum force level
(6-8kN) which does not alter the dilatation values and ‘M’ content. Exactly the
same effect as here (22MnB5 steel) is seen in 27MnCrB5 steel.
Conclusions
Summary and Conclusions

1- The effects of the process parameters on martensitic

transformation during a special non-isothermal deformation
which was planned very similar to the hot stamping process
schedules were studied.

2- It was shown that dilatometry and surface hardness mapping

techniques are very reliable methods for the evaluation of the
heterogeneous microstructures in steels.

3- Despite of slight discrepancy between the two methods, a

parallel application of the techniques give a close-to-reality
understanding of phase distributions and fractions.
Summary and Conclusions

4- A higher initial deformation temperature, a lower cooling rate

and a very low applied force levels, give higher fractions of
martensite in the final deformed parts.

5- The longer austenization soaking time resulted in a lower

Ms, while the amount of martensite in the final microstructure
remained approximately constant.

6- The dominant effects of mechanical stabilization of austenite

and bainitic transformation at different temperature regions must
be taken into account during the non-isothermal deformation.
Summary and Conclusions

7- There is a minimum force limit which does not alter the

dilatation values and the martensite content. In addition, it was
demonstrated that the higher applied force levels, reduce the
possibility of martensitic transformation.
 Future Works

- Further attempts are required to be able to distinguish

between different morphologies of microstructural phases in
steels to broaden the application of surface hardness mapping,
specially in cases like the evaluation of the microstrutures in the
welding zones.

- The effects of the applied force during the hot stamping

process and the reasons for the mentioned minimum force level
which does not alter the dilatation values, are the areas of
further investigations.
Further information
Thank you!