Mat is Technolog Comparison of Work Hardening Behaviour of Ferritic-Bainitic and Ferritic-Martensi Dual Phase Steels MM. Karimi, Sh. Kheirandish Department of Materials Engincoring and Metallurgy, lan Unversity of Sclance & Technology, ran Inthis research, te sess stan cures of two types of cual phase sees, namely fete baie and fer martensite steels wth 0.16%C {and 1.2% Mn have been cbained using tensile tests. Both steels were intreiica annealed under diferent condone and the fee baie stets subsequently quenced ina salt bath, while the frie martensitic stele were wator quenched, The sess-tain data of tho specimens were checked using Hollomon's equation. The results showed that both types of dual phase steals had wo stages of work hardening and each stage hada dferont work hardening exponent. The eects of volume facion of hard phases (bint and marten) ‘on ultimate tense strength, total elongation and work hardening exponent wer aso investigated. The results ndeated that wth increasing ‘volume faction of hard phase the UTS was increased whorea the work hardening exponent and ttl elongation were docreased Keywords: dul phaco sto work hardening, frit, bainte, martensite, mechanical propertes Dor: 10.2974/SRIo8sP082; submited on 7 Apri 2008, accepted on 26 August 2008 Introduction Dual-phase (DP) steels, developed over the past Few decades, offer impressive mechanical properties, such as continuous yielding behaviour and superior strength— ductility combination, in addition to the advantage of reduced cost, better formability, and excellent finished surface better than those of other high-strength lov-alloy (SLA) steels [1]. The development of DP steels has attracted interest inthe car and truck industries, because of the potential of weight reduction by using inexpensive alloying elements without sacrificing mechanical properties [2,3] ‘These steels are produced by either intereritcal annealing or controlled rolling [1]. The specific properties of DP steels such as continuous yielding behaviour, low 0.2% yield steength, high tensile strength, outstanding work hardening behaviour and high uniform and total clongation values derive from the mixture of hard martensite or bai transformation of austenite to martensite or bai dislocations are generated in the adjacent ferrite gr which cause the low yield strength values. explanation for the high work hardening values and therefore high tensile strength and high elongation values during deformation of DP steels is the concept of necessary dislocation by Ashby [5]. These dislocations are generated to allow the hard martensite and soft ferrite to deform in a compatible way. ‘The numbers of ferric martensitic dual phase (FMDP) steels investigations are much higher than those of ferric Dainitic dual phase (FBDP) steels. In addition, reports which are related to the relations of microstructure and ‘mechanical property of FBDP steels are limited (1). Noticeable attempt has been directed toward developing semi-empirical relations that describe the flow behaviour of polycrystalline materials. As the interface of ferrite: ‘martensite and ferite-bainite are matched, so the matrix of DP steel is continuous environment [6). Relationships proposed by Hollomon, Ludwik and Swift are the One 160 ‘Supplied by The British Library constitutive equations and most commonly used to describe the true stress-strain behaviour ofthese materials [7]. The parameters involved in. these constitutive equations have been used to investigate the underlying, mechanisms and changes in microstructures that occur during deformation, ‘The plastic flow behaviour of many metals and alloys, such 5 DP stecls, can be described by the Hollomon’s relation [7] as follows: onke o Where & and 1 are fiting constants usually termed as ‘work hardening coefficient and work-hardening exponent, respectively. By ploting the stress-strain data on a double logarithmic plot and fiting to a straight line at higher strain levels, these parameters can be determined, The slope ofthis line gives the value and the intercept at ¢ ives the k value, In an ideal case these wo flow Parameters should describe completely the shape of the true stress-strain curves. The value of & provides some indication of the level of the strength of the material, and magnitude of the forces required in forming, while the value of correlates the slope ofthe true stress-true stra curve, which provides determination of the ability of the ‘material to retard the localized deformation. It should be noted that the work-hardening parameters, kand 1, are of considerable technological importance [8]. The n value is less than unity, but it usually varies between 0.1 and 0.6 for metals, and inereases with decreasing the strength of ‘material (9). The exponent 1 isan important parameter for {wo reasons. It signifies the work-hardening characteristic cof a material, that is, the higher the value of , the higher the rate at which the materials are work hardened. A ‘material with a high value of 1 is preferred for processes Which involve plastic deformation. The second reason for its significance is that it is an indicator of the stretch formability of a material. The larger the n value, the more the material ean deform before instability, and the material ccan be stretched further before necking starts. This is so because » equals the true strain at the ultimate tensile steel research int. 80 (2008) No. 2 1e world's knowledgeMaterials Technolog strength, which isthe limiting value of o strain for uniform deformation [8-10] However, several previous invest- igators [1, 8, 11-15] indicated that a large number of materials such as dual phase steels do not obey this relation strictly. For these materials the variation of Ine versus Ine is nonlinear. ‘This means that only one set of mand & cean not describe the flow and work hardening behaviour of these materials. They showed that dual ‘Temperature ie Ae we diese phase steels show two stages of hardening followed by two work hhardening indices. ‘The present research is aimed to understand the work-hardening behaviour of FBDP and FMDP stels. ‘The experimental data for flow behaviour of DP stecls were fited to Tine Figure 1. Schomati representation ofthe heat teatment schedules fr obtaining: (@)forite-bainito and (be artenste microstructures. ‘Table 1. Chemical compostion in wt ofthe investigated stot the Hollomon equation and the work- hardening exponent (n) of FBDP steels c Ma a = ? a & and FMDP steels were compared with OL 015 o00s | 0099 | ss ‘each other. Experimental Procedure Commercial low carbon stecl has been used in this investigation. The steel was available inthe form of 2 mm_ thick sheet. The chemical composition of the steel is shown in Table 1. Ac, and Acs transformation tem= peratures of this steel were calculated from the empirical Formula [16], which are 715 and 840°C respectively. ‘Specimens of 30 mm width and 250 mm length were cut from the steel sheet and were first subjected to heat tweatment for achieving ferrite-bainite structures. This heat treatment consisted of the following sequential steps: (a) normalizing the stee! at 920°C for 30 min and air cooling, () intercrtically annealed at 760, 785 and 810°C for 15 min (¢) isothermally held at 370°C for 30 min in salt bath (@) air cooling to room temperature. A slightly different heat treatment schedule was followed to obiain ferrite ‘martensite dual-phase structures. This consisted of the above-mentioned steps (2) and (b) followed by quenching in water, The heat treatment schedules to produce various types of dual-phase fervte-bainite and ferrite-martensite steels are schematically shown in Figure 1a and 1b ‘The samples for microstructure studies were prepared and etched by 2% nital solution. The volume fractions of the different phases in the dual-phase microstructures were measured by point-counting technique according to ASTM 562-83 standard. Tensile specimens were prepared with 1 gauge length of 50 mm. Tensile tests were carried out at room temperature using a tensile machine with maximum load of 200 KN and strain rate of 1.310 =" Results and Discussion Microstructure. Microstructure observation showed that intereritical annealing and quenching in salt bath and steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 2 ‘Supplied by The British Library water, create a fervite-bainite and ferrite-martensite structure respectively. Light micrographs of steels with Uifferent vol% of bainite (V4) and martensite (V,) are shown in Figures 2 and 3. The employed heat treatment at 760, 785 and 810°C led to different combinations of ferrite-bainite microstructures having V, of 21.7, 30.2 and 52% respectively, and different ferrite-martensite micro- structures having V of 23.1, 34.5 and 55.4% respectively ‘The higher volume fractions of martensite than bainite, at the same intercritical temperature, must be due to the higher amounts of new ferrite, which forms during the cooling cycle after austempering [17, 18} During intercritical annealing, austenite forms in two steps. The first step is transformation of pearlite 10 austenite and then the second step is dissolution of ferrite in the newly formed austenite [19]. Because of the rapid transformation of pearlte to austenite [19], in the investigated structures no pearlite appears. It means that the fist step of austenite formation is complete after 15 min tall temperatures. In FBDP steels after annealing at 760°C, the amount of bainite was 21.7%, which is the result of pearlite trans- formation and some dissolution of ferrite in austenite. An increase by 25°C for the same annealing time (1S min), ‘causes an 8.5% increase in bainite content It means that a higher temperature causes more dissolution of ferrite in austenite, FMDP steels also showed a similar behaviour. ‘The rate of austenite Formation in the second step depends highly on ternperature and increases with increas ing temperature [20]. Thus, a temperature rise from 785 to SI0°C in FBDP steels causes a 19.8% increase in bainite content, which is higher than the 8.5% inerease de to the temperature rise from 760 to 785°C. By increasing dissolu- tion of ferrite in the austenite, the carbon content in the austenite decreases, which can affect martensite and bainite hardness (21) 161 1e world's knowledgeMatorials Technolog Ultimate tensile strength and total elongation, Vriation of the ultimate tensile strength (¢yq) Of these stezis with volume tiaetions of the herd phases (Vip), brinite anc marersite, ere shown in Figure 4. Variation of the tel vagalion with ¥,pis also potted in Figure §, As can be seen in the two chart, ultimate tensile strength increases linearly with increasing Vasu while total elongation sleereases for both FBDP acd FMD? steels. According 10 he lew of mixture, the sirength of DP steels is related ‘exactly to the yolume faction an the strength of hard phase. Thus, ce higher sirength of FMDP steel compared to that of FEDP siec! is also dependent on the highe> sirength of marcensite in comparison with bainite att same carton ontent[22) Work hardening, Figures 6 and 7 show typical !no-Ine plois of FBDP and FMDP sieels, with different Vin, at oor temperature. They show that Hallomon's equation can be used perivetly for the characteriastion of these steels, All the lines in these fgures have two slopes; it ‘means thet DP steels show the two stages of work hardening mechanism. The first stage has a high strain hardening exponent, while the second stage has a low ane, ‘These results are in agreement with the previous research ‘on work hardening behaviour of dual phase steels [1,8,L1= 15), According to these studies the first sage is associated with plastic deformation of the ferrite matrix and she sevond stage is associsted with plastic deformation of both ferrite and martensite or banite, As can be seen in Figures $ and 9, the work hardening ‘exponent of stage | of FDP is higher thaa that of EMDP_ sicels. Ths is generally consiéerec io result due to disloce- tion pile up at the fercte-martensiwe interfece. Ashay [6] ssugied the éeformation of plastically nor-homogeneous ‘materials and novad thet cnany ‘vo-phase materials are work hardened faster than single-phase alloys. This is because the Wo phases are not equally easy 10 deform, One component shows greater plast.c deformation then the ‘other, 80 thai gradients of deformation build up with 2 wavelength of similar distance to the spacing between phases, These alloys are plastically conhomogencous and the gradients of deformation require stored dislocations, as illusitted in Figure 7. Such dislocations are called geometrically necessary dislocations and contribute t0 the ‘work hardening of two-phase alloys [6 Spiech and Miller [23] have proposed that an increased Alislocation density in the ferrite region due to the genera- tion of necessary dislocations, and relaxation of residual stresses due to small plastic strain affect strain hardening in FMD? steeis. in feet, expansion occurred caring trans- ‘ormation of austenite © marcensite in heat seatment leads 1 an increase in dislocation density in ferit, whieh sub= sequently influences stain hardening, ‘On the other hand, investigations related to the eformation behaviour of FBDP steels are limited in umber. Kumat et al [1] have sug-gesied hat sirin Partitioning between bainice und ferite is less eompered to that between martensite and femite Figure 2. Microstructures of studi ste! contaring: a) 21.7%, b) 50-29 and fe) 52% of bate volume Faction. The whe eanstiven Testo wneraas tha black sont tuert abana Figure 3, Wicrestucuras of stucid ete consiventis ero wherees the savko: constituent 8 meena 162 ising (a) 28.1%, (0) 6.5% and (2) $5.4% of martenske volume ftagion. The whe Steel research int. 80 (2008) No. 2 ‘Supplied by The British Library - "The world's knowledge”Materials Technology soaks epee tan Figure 5. Total elongation as a function of hard phase volume traction i P steels. o Figure 6. Typzal La-Ln plot of tv stess versus tue stain for Investigated FBDP ste! wth dferent bante vole racion. fee e ge Figure 8. Work hardening exponent as a function of baie ‘olum faction I FBDP soos ‘The heat treatment schedule for FBDP and FMDP steels ‘was the same. Thus, ferrite grain size can be expected to be the same for both types ofthe developed steels. Hence, ferrite grain size cannot be considered as the cause for the difference in work hardening behaviour of the developed steels, In addition, residual stresses and dislocation density resulting from transformation will be lower in the ease of FBDP steels compared to that in FMDP steels and these toe! research int, 80 (2009) No. 2 Figure 7. Typical Ln-Ln pot of te stress versus tue stan for Investigated FMDP ste! with diferent martensite volumo fraction Figure 9. 7 Work hardening exponent as a function of martensite volume facton in FADP stools. factors would favour a higher work hardening rate in FBDP steels. Thus, the reason for higher n, value of FBDP steels compared to that of FMDP steels can be considered to originate from the lov dislocation density in the FBDP steels. It must be noticed that lower residual stress and dis location density in the case of FBDP compared to FMDP steels are related to lower volume change in transforma- tion from austenite to bainite compared to martensite (22) 163 ‘Supplied by The British Library - "The world's knowledge”Materials Technology ‘As already mentioned, the strain-hardening exponent of stage [of FMDP and FBDP steels decreases with increas- ing volume fraction of martensite and bainite, Cribb and Rigsbee [24] showed that changes from 0.25 to 0.14 with martensite vol% rising from 15 to 50% in FMDP ste ‘The magnitude of stage T work hardening (m) for the selected steel is found to vary from 0.28 to 0.15 for mare tensite vol% of 23.1 and 554% for FMDP, and 0.41 to 0.27 for bainite vol% of 21.7 and 52% for FBDP steols, ‘Thus, the obtained nature of variation of m for the FMDP. and FBDP steels is in agreement with the example mentioned above, ‘The variation of mean be analysed using localized ferrite plastic strain (LEPS), which develops during transforma- tion from austenite t9 martensite or bainite in dual phase steels [1]. The LFPS is influenced by the extent of the plastic zone in ferrite, the average dislocation density and the associated strain in ferrite. As the volume fraction of ‘martensite or bainite is raised in dual-phase steels, localized plastic strain is increased and the 1 value is decreased in both steels. "At the present time, the variation of » with bainite fraction in low carbon steels and with low percentages of Dainite is not available in the existing literature. Thus the present resulls could not be compared with any earlice similar results, The localized plastic strain caused by the generation of dislocations during the bainitic trans formation inereases with increase in bainite content, but since the bainitic transformation takes place at 370°C, the localized plastic strain is expected to be smaller than that in FMDP steels The work hardening exponent of stage 2 is lower than that of stage I in both FBDP and FMDP steels, which is related to the rising strength of the structures that deform in this stage (both ferrite and martensite or bainite). Aecor- ding to Figures 8-9, there i little change in the my value with increasing Vg and Vy. In fact, nz slightly decreases with increasing Vy and Va , which can be related to the ‘nerease in strength by increasing Vand Vm (Figure 4). Conclusions ‘The work hardening behaviour of a series of ferritic— bainitic and ferrtic-martensitic dual-phase steels made 164 ‘Supplied by The British Library from low carbon steel has been examined. The results of| the investigation lead to the following conclusions: FMDP and FBDP steels showed two work hardening stages correspond with activated deformation mechanisms, In both steels, the work hardening exponent at stages | is decreased with increasing Vip but the work hardening exponent at stage 2 was nearly independent of Vip. FBDP steels have higher work hardening exponent at stages | and 2 in comparison with FMDP steels References UAL Kumar et al: Aster Se Eng, A oi: 101016} ns 2007.05.007 2] MIL "Ssleh, "R”Poriesner Jounal of Materials Processing Techaology, 133 2001), 387.393. [3] JA Rigsbec, PJ. Vandersrends Formable HSLA. and Dusepiue Sisk, TMS-AIME, Warendale PA 1979, pp 5686, {3} §. SM. Push: Maer Sek, Eng, A338 (200), 298-308, [5] M.F- Ashby: The Philosophies! Nazi, 21 (196) 398 [6] 5. Ankem etal: Press in Matias Scene, St (2006) 632-709, [0] SN. Morcic, RE Reet Hil: Met Trans, 4 (1973), 1011-1015 IS] NR Aktarpour, Av kami Maer. Sc Eng! A 2007), oi. 1016f mse-2007.05.051 [9] RAW. Hemaberss “Deformation and Trace Mechanics of Engineering Matis Joa Wiley nd Sons, USA, 1996 [Uo] Das: Material Popes sed Maoutaing Procees, Wiley, "New York, 1966 UUM, Atbarpou, A. Eka 41010165 mac 207.0.099, U2IWR Gath, IM. Rishs: Smita and Propeice of Dual Phase ‘Stes, TME-AIME, R.A. Kot, New- Orson, 1979, pp91-117. (US]LF. Ramos, DK. Matlock, G. Krauss: Met. Trane A, 108 (1979), 259.261, [Isl Panu DY Edmonds: Maer. Sei& Eng A, 17 (1989), 61-74, {151 Linn, 2 ang. Li: Mater ei & Eng A 47 (991), 5545, 16)6. Krass: "Prinepls of heat ueament oft", Am. Soc Met, 15 (1980), 240-248 [7]. Ocdophan: Scripta Matra, 48 (2003), 50-506, LUSIM. Sonsaretal: Materia and Desian 28 0007) 335-3. DIOR Spec, VA. Demarest, LL flor Met. Tans A, 128 (1981), 1191895, [POIM. A. Assad, M. Godan Sh conn, Mater Sei Eng. A (2007, indie SI at in press ‘Spiech, RL. Miler: SoliSolidPhae Transformation, AINE, ysas 8 Hiand Book, Vol. 4, pp 1240-1260, 2008, [3]G.R. Spec, RL: Mil, tn: RA. Kot, W. Non (Ed), Sractre ‘and Fropenies of Dan Phase Stel, AIME, New Ver, 1979, pp 1 [RW Cribb, LAL Rizsbee, fe RA. Kot, JN, Moms (Es), Srctre nd Proprise of Dual Phane Stay AIME, New York 1979, pp. 91-117 steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 2 1e world's knowledge