Thin-Walled Structures 132 (2018) 410–420

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thin-Walled Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tws

Full length article

Low temperature impact toughness of high strength structural steel T

a,b a,b a,b c d,⁎
Lewei Tong , Lichao Niu , Shuang Jing , Liwen Ai , Xiao-Ling Zhao
a
State Key Laboratory for Disaster Reduction in Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
b
College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, China
c
Shanghai Ershiye Construction Co.,Ltd, Shanghai, China
d
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Impact toughness properties of four kinds of high strength steel (HSS) were investigated with the nominal yield
High strength steel strength 460, 690, 800 and 960 MPa, respectively. The specialty of impact toughness among base metal, heat
Base metal affected zone (HAZ) and weld metal were also compared and discussed. The correlations between the impact
Weld metal toughness of HSS and their nominal yield strength, plate thicknesses, testing temperature, welding methods were
Heat affected zone (HAZ)
further studied. Combined with the scanning electron microscope (SEM) fracture surface observation, the mi-
Impact toughness
Low temperature
crostructural features and corresponding fracture mechanisms have been analyzed. The results show that the
Ductile-brittle transition temperature (DBTT) impact toughness for HSS base metal deteriorated with the increasing nominal yield strength. The impact
toughness of weld metal for HSS is much lower than that of the corresponding base metal. The impact perfor-
mance of HAZ is discretized due to the welding thermal cycling on the HAZ where significant changes in grain
structure and properties occur. The microcosmic fracture surface of HSS is examined to explain the reduction in
impact performance under low temperature.

1. Introduction specimens, the corresponding impact absorbed energy can be obtained.

Nowadays, the application of high strength steel (HSS) is growing in
various fields, such as civil, mechanical and ocean engineering [1–5].
High strength steel is manufactured aiming for their optimal combi-
nation of physical and mechanical properties, including strength, duc-
tility and toughness performance. The use of HSS may lead to an overall
reduced weight and energy consumption due to light-weight HSS
components. The mechanical properties of HSS are different from the
conventional strength steel because of the different chemical compo-
sition and manufacturing process, and are worth investigating.
In the past large amount of work on HSS was focused on their
chemical composition, melting processes and welding material com-
patibility. In terms of structural performance, studies were recently
carried out on basic static performance [6–18], seismic behaviors
[19–21] and fatigue stability [22–27].
Impact toughness, which is directly related to fracture resistance, is
one of the most important properties for HSS in engineering applica-
tions. Generally, as the strength of steels increases, their impact
toughness may reduce. Therefore, special attention should be paid to
the impact toughness of high strength steels [28].
The impact toughness of conventional strength steels has been
widely studied [29–33,54]. Through the impact test on Charpy V-notch
For example, Méndez et al. [33] have found a quantitative relationship
between impact toughness CVN and fracture toughness KIC for A36 steel
(250 MPa), i.e. the CVN value can be proportionally converted to
fracture toughness KIC under certain conditions.
Because the research and application of high strength steel are still
at an early stage [34–43], the study on the impact toughness properties
of HSS is still limited. The current research shows that the content of
alloying elements and the smelting process have a greater influence on
its impact toughness. Shin et al. [34] studied the effect of Copper (Cu)
and Boron (B) elements on the grain size and impact toughness of
600 MPa grade high strength steel. The results showed that element B
reduced the grain size, improved the impact toughness and reduced the
brittle transition temperature. Tanguy et al. [35] conducted an impact
toughness test on a 600 MPa high strength steel and the results showed
that the increasing content of sulfides reduced the impact properties.
Liu et al. and Wang et al. [38,39] studied the impact toughness of
Q460C (460 MPa) HSS and found its impact toughness was relatively
lower than those of conventional strength steel such as Q235 and Q390
(235 MPa, 390 MPa). Maina et al. [40] studied the impact properties of
700 MPa high strength steel in two different impact directions (parallel
and perpendicular to the rolling direction) and the results showed that
the crack path mainly initiated and developed along the intergranular

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: ZXL@monash.edu (X.-L. Zhao).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2018.09.009
Received 8 June 2018; Received in revised form 29 August 2018; Accepted 3 September 2018
0263-8231/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
L. Tong et al. Thin-Walled Structures 132 (2018) 410–420

Nomenclature Q Nominal yield strength symbol in Chinese relevant codes

for structural steels
A1 The lower shelf energy LSE Q690-20 The HSS with the nominal yield strength 690 MPa and the
A2 The upper shelf energy USE plate thickness is 20 mm, same for other HSSs
Akv Charpy impact absorbed energy Q690-20-BM The base metal BM of Q690-20 HSS, same for other
Akv,T Akv at the temperature T HSSs
B Thickness of Charpy impact specimens Q690-20-S(G)-WM The weld metal WM of Q690 HSS in SAW (or
b Length of the remaining ligament at the Charpy specimen GMAW-CO2) process, same for other HSSs
V-notch Q690-20-S(G) -HAZ The heat affected zone HAZ of Q690 HSS in
Dkv,T Relative decline rate of Akv,T for HSS base metal SAW (or GMAW-CO2) process, same for other HSSs
fy,n Nominal yield strength T Testing temperatures in °C
fy,m Measured yield strength T0 The ductile-brittle transition temperature (DBTT)
fu Tensile strength Yh The shelf energy ratio which is the ratio of A1 and A2
Hl The normalized toughness ratio (1-Yh) The transition shelf energy ratio
K Modified stress concentration factor at the V-notch ΔT The brittle-ductile transition region
L Charpy impact specimen span δ Elongation
NF Normalization factor for subsize Charpy impact specimens

path due to the extension of the grain in the length direction. Mori et al.
[41] focused on the variation of the impact toughness of the 4340 Steel
(835 MPa) high strength steel subjected to hydrogen treatment, the
change of characteristics in dimple structures under the microscopic
scale were observed and discussed. Prasas and Dwivedi [42] in-
vestigated the basic mechanical properties of HSS joints under sub-
merged arc welding (SAW) process. The results showed that the in-
crease of heat input leads to the deterioration of impact performance
with brittle failure. Langenberg [43] presented the relationship be-
tween the structural safety design and the yield ratios for three high
strength steels (up to 890 MPa), and a comparison of their impact
toughness.
The current researches for the impact performance of high strength
steel are limited, the comparison and mechanism analysis for different
high strength steels are still lacking. In this study, the impact toughness
properties of four kinds of HSS were measured, with the nominal yield
strength 460, 690, 800 and 960 MPa, respectively. The specialty of
impact toughness among base metal (BM), heat affected zone (HAZ)
and weld metal (WM) were also investigated. Furthermore, the micro-
structural features and corresponding fracture mechanisms have been
studied using scanning electron microscope (SEM). The ductile-to-
brittle transition process of HSS materials from microvoid coalescence
to cleavage are discussed in detail with the decreasing temperatures.
2. HSS materials and charpy impact experimental procedures
2.1. HSS materials and specimens
Four typical high strength steels were selected to evaluate the low
temperature impact toughness with the nominal yield strength 460,
690, 800, 960 MPa, respectively, with different thickness (10 mm,
20 mm and 30 mm). The specimen labels for the base metal are de-
signed in Table 1 where Q stands for nominal yield strength followed by
the value of the yield strength, BM stands for base metal and the
number in between refers to the plate thickness. For example, Q460-20-
BM refers to a base metal specimen with a yield strength of 460 MPa
and thickness of 20 mm. The mechanical properties from tensile tests
and chemical compositions from certification documents for the HSSs
base materials are given in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.
Specimens for Charpy impact testing were extracted from the butt
welded joints. A schematic representation of the locations from which
specimens were extracted is given in Fig. 1. Standard Charpy impact
specimens of 55 × 10 × 10 mm3 in size and subsize specimens of a size
of 55 × 10 × 7.5 mm3 were fabricated following the standards ASTM
A370 [44] and Chinese code GB/T 229–2007 [45], the V-notch of HAZ
impact specimens are located 1 mm (to base metal direction) from the
fusion line.
2.2. Welding procedure qualification (WPQ)
In order to assess the impact toughness of the weld metal and heat
affected zone (HAZ), the HSS welding procedure qualification was
employed before the impact tests in accordance with the guidelines
given in AWS D1.1 Steel Structural Welding Code [46] and the corre-
sponding Chinese code [47]. Quenched and tempered HSS plates,
measuring 1000 mm × 400 mm, were machined so that they had
double-V groove weld preparations to suit both the submerged arc
welding (SAW) and gas metal arc welding (GMAW-CO2) in the flat
welding 1-G (down hand) position. The filler metals selected are mat-
ched with the base metal, and the details from certification documents
are shown in the Tables 3 and 4. The Shanghai Ershiye Construction
Co., Ltd conducted the welding procedure qualification (WPQ) and the
WPQ results met the requirements of specifications. Welding para-
meters employed in the SAW and GMAW-CO2 are shown in Table 5.
2.3. Testing procedures of Charpy impact
As shown in Fig. 2, a Charpy impact testing machine ZBC2302 has
been used in the tests, equipped with a pendulum with a capacity of
300 J. These impact tests were carried out in the temperature range

Table 1
Tensile properties of the base metal of high strength steels in this test.
Specimen label Nominal yield strength fy,n Plate Thickness (mm) Measured yield strength fy,m Tensile strength fu Yield ratio fy,m / Elongation δ (%)
(MPa) (MPa) (MPa) fu

Q460-20-BM 460 20 495 623 0.79 35.6

Q690-10-BM 690 10 801 842 0.95 18.8
Q690-20-BM 690 20 771 822 0.94 25.2
Q800-30-BM 800 30 876 920 0.95 22.8
Q960-10-BM 960 10 1033 1071 0.96 14.5

411
L. Tong et al. Thin-Walled Structures 132 (2018) 410–420

Table 2
Chemical compositions of the base metal of high strength steels in this test (wt%).
Specimen label C Cr Al Si Mn P S Ni Cu Nb V B

Q460-20-BM 0.14 0.06 0.033 0.28 1.53 0.011 0.0014 0.01 0.01 0.032 0.040 0.0004
Q690-10-BM 0.14 0.21 0.032 0.30 1.23 0.014 0.0006 0.01 0.02 0.013 0.004 0.0019
Q690-20-BM 0.14 0.50 0.034 0.29 1.24 0.014 0.0022 0.02 0.01 0.013 0.005 0.0017
Q800-30-BM 0.14 0.42 0.031 0.27 1.2 0.011 0.0019 0.02 0.02 0.015 0.004 0.0015
Q960-10-BM 0.15 0.20 0.056 0.22 1.2 0.004 0.003 0.02 0.03 0.018 0.04 0.002

from −40 to 20 °C at an interval of 20 °C to obtain the full transition
curves. Each test was repeated with three identical specimens. The
specimens were cooled in a conditioning chamber using liquid nitrogen
and ethanol for a period of time so that the interior and surface of the
specimens achieved the same temperatures. The transfer of specimen
for the impact test was within 5 s which guaranteed the consistency and
reduced the loss of temperature to a minimum.
3. Experimental results
All Charpy impact test results are shown in the Table 6 and Fig. 3.
The results of subsize specimens were already converted to values valid
for comparison with those of standard size specimens following the
recommendations of available research [48], which suggests that the
Charpy impact absorbed energy is in proportion to the specimen
thickness. The expression is given as follows.
4.1. Variation features of the impact toughness for HSS base metal
4.1.1. Effect of the nominal yield strength on impact toughness of HSS base
metal
Fig. 4 shows the comparison of Charpy impact absorbed energy Akv
of HSS base metal with the same thickness and different nominal yield
strengths. It can be observed that for the same testing temperature, Akv
of Q960-10-BM are lower than that of Q690-10-BM, with a maximum
reduction of 31.5% at 20 °C, and a minimum reduction of 27% at
−40 °C. Akv of Q690-20-BM is slightly lower than that of Q460-20-BM.
It can be concluded that there is a significant performance de-
gradation of the impact toughness for HSS base metal with the in-
creasing nominal yield strength. The higher the yield strength, the
lower the ultimate-to-yield strength ratio. The plastic flow of the defect
tip is constrained, and the three-dimensional stress field of the crack tip
increases the yield stress of the material. The stress intensification also
causes the HSS to be more brittle.

NF = Bb2 / KL
where NF is the normalization factor (the unit of NF is [mm2]), B is the
specimen thickness, b is the length of the remaining ligament at the
notch, K is the modified stress concentration factor at the notch (the
term K has no unit) and L is the specimen span. The CVN impact energy
for the standard Charpy impact specimens can be obtained by multi-
plying subsize test data of the thinner specimens by a factor of 1.33 (=
10 / 7.5).
(1)
4.1.2. Effect of the plate thickness on impact toughness of HSS base metal
Fig. 5 shows the comparison of Charpy impact absorbed energy of
HSS base metal with the same nominal yield strength but different plate
thicknesses. It can be observed that Akv of Q690-20-BM are higher than
those of Q690-10-BM for the same temperature, increasing by 2.1% (at
20 °C),5.5% (at 0 °C), 8.1% (at −20 °C), 5.5% (at −40 °C), respectively.
The impact toughness performance of HSS increases slightly with the
plate thickness.

4. Disscussion
Fig. 3 shows the change of impact absorbed energy of high strength
steels with the decreasing temperatures. The multiple-factor analysis of
impact toughness for HSS base metal, weld metal and HAZ are as fol-
lows.
4.1.3. Relative decline rate Dkv,T. of impact absorbed energy for HSS base
metal
Taking the impact absorbed energy at 20 °C, namely, the Akv,20, as
the baseline reference, Dkv,T is defined as the relative decline rate of
Akv,T for base metals at temperature T (Eq. (2)). Dkv,T at each tem-
perature are shown in Table 7.

Fig. 1. Schematic locations for Charpy impact specimens.

412
L. Tong et al. Thin-Walled Structures 132 (2018) 410–420

Table 3
Chemical compositions of filler metals for welding process in this test (wt%).
Groups Welding methods Code name of welding wire & welding flux Chemical compositions

C S Mn P Si Mo Cu Cr

Q460-20-G GMAW-CO2 THQ-60D 0.09 0.009 1.59 0.010 0.60 0.34 0.13 0.12
Q460-20-S SAW THM-08MnMoA 0.08 0.007 1.49 0.011 0.22 0.41 0.09 0.01
Q690-20-G GMAW-CO2 THQ70-1 0.08 0.014 1.57 0.009 0.60 0.49 0.10 0.19
Q690-20-S SAW Weld-SG80 0.084 0.007 1.70 0.006 0.18 0.51 0.05 0.45
Q800-30-G GMAW-CO2 THQ80-1 0.08 0.013 1.60 0.008 0.59 0.50 0.10 0.18
Q960-10-G GMAW-CO2 ER120S-G 0.07 0.009 1.80 0.008 0.41 0.55 0.09 0.45

Akv,20 − Akv, T Table 5

Dkv, T =
Akv,20 (2) Welding parameters employed in the SAW and GMAW-CO2 process in this test.
Specimen Welding Current (A) Voltage (V) Weld speed
Table 7 shows that, at the same temperature, not only Akv but also
label method (mm/min)
Dkv,T decreases with the increasing nominal yield strength. For steels
with the same nominal yield strength, Dkv,T decreases with increasing Q460-20-S-WM SAW 480–505 30.2–33.6 432
plate thickness. The Dkv,T of Q690-20-BM are 2.6~4.9% lower than Q460-20-G-WM GMAW-CO2 260 ± 10% 28.5–30.6 241
Q690-20-S-WM SAW 463–530 29.5–33.6 403
those of Q690-10-BM, indicating a slightly better impact performance.
Q690-20-G-WM GMAW-CO2 230–257 28.1–28.8 263
Q800-30-G-WM GMAW-CO2 270 ± 10% 28.1–30.0 160
4.2. Variation features of the impact toughness for HSS weld metal and Q960-10-G-WM GMAW-CO2 295 ± 10% 26.5–30.0 203

HAZ
Fig. 6 shows the variation of impact absorbed energy Akv in the weld
metal and HAZ, followed with detailed discussion.
4.2.1. HSS weld metal
For all the high strength steels tested in this program, as can be seen
from Fig. 6, the impact absorbed energy Akv of the weld metal is always
less than that of the corresponding base metal. Therefore, it is con-
firmed that the heat input during the welding process deteriorates the
toughness performance of the weld metal and its vicinity, which is the
weakest link of the welded structures in the fracture-prevention design
at low temperatures.
For the weld metal of Q460-20 HSS, the impact absorbed energy Akv
of Q460-20-S-WM (SAW) is 24.1~54.5% less than those of the corre-
sponding base metal Q460-20-BM, and Akv of the Q460-20-G-WM
(GMAW) weld metal decreased by 13.4~62.9% relative to its base
metal.
For the weld metal of Q690-20 HSS, the impact absorbed energy Akv
of Q690-20-S-WM (SAW) is 43.7~60.2% less than those of the Q690-
20-BM, and Akv of the Q690-20-G-WM (GMAW) weld metal decreased
by 44.2~64.4% relative to its base metal.
For the weld metal of Q800-30 HSS, the impact absorbed energy Akv
of Q800-30-G-WM (GMAW) are 67.5~80.2% less than those of the
Q800-30-BM. The rapid decline of Akv can be attributed to an increase
in welding defects and higher heat input caused by increasing plate
thickness.
For the weld metal of Q960-10 HSS, the impact absorbed energy Akv
of Q960-10-G-WM (GMAW) weld metal is 34.2~65.2% less than those
of the corresponding base metal Q960-10-BM. The majority of Akv for
Q960D-10 HSS is the elastic energy due to its much higher yield
strength, and the capacity to resist crack propagation or plastic de-
formation is limited. With the decrease of the testing temperature, the
decreasing trend of the Akv increases progressively, indicating that the
impact performance of the weld metal of HSS is more sensitive to low
temperatures with a significant brittleness.
Following observations can be made from the above discussion.
4.2.1.1. Effect of the nominal yield strength fy of base metal on the impact
toughness of weld metal. Similar to the base metal, the impact
performance Akv of HSS weld metal also decreases with the increasing
nominal yield strength of base metal at the same temperature. Q460-20-
S(G)-WM has the highest Akv, followed with Q690-20-S(G)-WM, Q800-
30-G-WM and Q960-10-G-WM. The Akv of Q960-10-G-WM are 49.5%
less than that of Q460-20-G-WM at −40 °C.
4.2.1.2. Effect of welding methods on the impact toughness of weld
metal. There appear to be little difference between the impact
absorbed energy Akv of weld metal which are implemented with
different welding methods (GMAW or SAW). It can be concluded that
welding methods have less influence on the impact toughness of the
weld metal, compared with the effect of welding heat input. When the
test temperature is lower, the impact performance of the weld metal
under SAW process is slightly better than that under GMAW. At the
higher test temperatures, the impact toughness of the GMAW is slightly
better.

Table 4
Mechanical properties of filler metals for welding process in this test.
Groups Welding Code name of welding wire Mechanical properties
methods & welding flux
Measured yield strength Measured tensile strength Elongation δ (%) Charpy impact absorbed
fy,m (MPa) fy,m (MPa) energy (J) at − 40 °

Q460-20-G GMAW-CO2 THQ-60D 483 571 24 78

Q460-20-S SAW THM-08MnMoA 536 621 27 59
Q690-20-G GMAW-CO2 THQ70-1 640 750 22 75
Q690-20-S SAW Weld-SG80 710 820 20 86
Q800-30-G GMAW-CO2 THQ80-1 736 868 19.5 98
Q960-10-G GMAW-CO2 ER120S-G 940 1005 14 40

413
L. Tong et al. Thin-Walled Structures 132 (2018) 410–420

Fig. 2. Charpy impact machine and part of the specimens after tests.

Table 6
Charpy impact absorbed energy Akv of high strength steels (Unit: J).
Groups Specimen label Temperatures

20 °C 0 °C -20 °C − 40 °C

Base metal Q460-20-BM 261 239 204 200

Q690-10-BM 235 219 198 181
Q690-20-BM 240 231 214 191
Q800-30-BM 240 238 227 208
Q960-10-BM 161 155 143 132
Weld metal Q460-20-S-WM 178 182 149 91
Q460-20-G-WM 226 203 141 74
Q690-20-S-WM 122 130 115 76
Q690-20-G-WM 134 122 97 68
Q800-30-G-WM 78 60 45 38
Q960-10-G-WM 106 77 70 46
HAZ Q460-20-S-HAZ 250 247 249 229
Q460-20-G-HAZ 251 240 260 220
Q690-20-S-HAZ 246 232 203 193 Fig. 4. Comparison of impact absorbed energy Akv of HSS base metal with the
Q690-20-G-HAZ 237 231 222 212 same thickness but different nominal yield strength.
Q800-30-G-HAZ 233 236 213 205
Q960-10-G-HAZ 169 166 146 131

Fig. 5. Comparison of impact absorbed energy Akv of HSS base metal with the
same nominal yield strength but different thicknesses.

Fig. 3. Charpy impact absorbed energy for the HSS base metal, weld metal and
HAZ at different temperatures.
4.2.2. HSS HAZ part
For all the HSS investigated, as can be seen from Fig. 6, the impact
absorbed energy Akv of the HAZ is always close to that of the corre-
sponding base metal when the temperature is above 0 °C. When the
temperature goes down to −40 °C, for the HAZ of Q460-20 HSS, the
impact absorbed energy Akv of Q460-20-S-HAZ (both SAW and GMAW)
is about 22–27% higher than that of the base metal Q460-20-BM. For
higher steel grade (Q690, Q800 and Q960), the impact absorbed energy
Akv is very close to that of the corresponding base metal even at −40 °C.
Following observations can be made from the above discussion.
4.2.2.1. Effect of the nominal yield strength fy of base metal on the impact
toughness of HAZ. Similar to the base metal, the impact performance Akv
of HAZ also decreases with the increasing nominal yield strength of

414
L. Tong et al. Thin-Walled Structures 132 (2018) 410–420

Table 7
Dkv,T. for each HSS base metal at various temperatures.
Specimen label Temperatures

20 °C 0 °C -20 °C -40 °C

Q460-20-BM 0% 8.4% 21.8% 23.4%

Q690-10-BM 0% 6.8% 15.7% 23.0%
Q690-20-BM 0% 3.8% 10.8% 20.4%
Q800-30-BM 0% 0.8% 5.4% 13.3%
Q960-10-BM 0% 3.7% 11.2% 18.0%

base metal at the same temperature. Q460-20-S(G)-HAZ has the highest

Akv, followed with Q690-20-S(G)-HAZ, Q800-30-G-HAZ and Q960-10-
G-HAZ. The Akv of Q960-10-G-HAZ is 42.8% less than that of Q460-20-
S-HAZ at −40 °C.
4.2.2.2. Effect of welding methods on the impact toughness of HAZ. There
is little difference between the Akv of HAZ under different welding
methods (GMAW or SAW). The difference is less than 4.5% between
Q460-20-G-HAZ and Q460-20-S-HAZ, whereas the difference is less
than 10% between Q690-20-G-HAZ and Q690-20-S-HAZ.
A schematic view of the trend for Akv among base metal, weld metal
and HAZ is shown in Fig. 7.
5. Boltzmann function fitting for the ductile-brittle transition
curve
Confirmed by numerous experiments [49], the Boltzmann Function
Fig. 7. Trend line of Akv among base metal (BM), weld metal (WM) and heat-
affected-zone (HAZ).
gave a good regression fitting results in describing the relationship
between impact absorbed energy Akv and the testing temperature T
with small residual and a reasonable correlation. The Boltzmann
Function can be expressed as:
A1 − A2
Akv = + A2
1 + e(T − T0)/ ΔT (3)
where Akv is the Charpy absorbed energy, A1 is the lower shelf energy
(LSE), A2 is the upper shelf energy (USE), and T is the testing tem-
perature in °C. The term T0 is the ductile-brittle transition temperature

Fig. 6. Comparison of the impact toughness among base metal, weld zone and HAZ for each high strength steel.

415
L. Tong et al. Thin-Walled Structures 132 (2018) 410–420

Fig. 8. Typical Boltzmann curve (Q460-20-BM) . Fig. 9. Comparison of impact toughness results of HSS.

(DBTT) which corresponds to the average energy value (i.e. (USE +

LSE) / 2), and ΔT is the range of the brittle-ductile transition region.
When the environmental temperature is lower than the transition
temperature T0, structures are more likely to have a brittle fracture.
A typical Boltzmann curve for Q460-20-BM is shown in Fig. 8 where
the impact absorbed energy can be divided into the upper shelf region,
lower shelf region and ductile-brittle transition region. The impact
absorbed energy decreases sharply in the ductile-brittle transition re-
gion when the temperature decreases. The brittle transition tempera-
ture T0 is generally required to be lower than the environmental tem-
perature. The ductile-brittle transition temperature DBTT is an
important indicator to evaluate the toughness of materials. The higher
the DBTT is, the easier the material changes to brittle fracture at low
temperatures.
Table 8 show the Boltzmann fitting curves and parameters for the
impact toughness of HSS base metal. In order to compare the ductile-
brittle transition process and its sensitivity, Hl and Yh are defined to
focus on the relative change of impact toughness to temperatures. The
normalization excludes the difference among the absolute values of Akv
for different HSSs. The expressions for Yh and Hl are given in Eqs. (4)
and (5).
Yh = A1 / A2 (4)

Hl = (1 − Yh)/ ΔT (5)

The smaller the Hl is, the slower the ductile-brittle transition process
is. It can be seen from Table 8 that Hl decreases with the increasing
nominal yield strength. Hl of Q460-20-BM is significantly higher (2
times at least) than those of Q690-10-BM, Q690-20-BM, Q800D-30-BM
and Q960-10-BM. Therefore, the HSS with a higher nominal yield
strength has a lower Hl, leading to a relatively less pronounced down-
trend in the transition zone.
Table 8 also shows the variation of upper shelf energy USE, lower
shelf energy LSE, DBTT T0 and transition zone ΔT. Discussions for each Fig. 10. Two kinds of microcosmic fracture modes, (a) Microvoid coalescence
fitting parameter are shown below. MVC, (b) Transgranular fracture and Intergranular fracture.
USE A2 of the HSS base metal decreased with the increase of the
nominal yield strength, e.g. the USE of Q960-10-BM decreases by
37.6% with respect to that of Q460-20-BM. Similar trend is found for

Table 8
Parameters of Boltzmann fitting curves for HSS impact performance.
Specimen label USEA2 (J) LSE A1 ( J) DBTTT0 (℃) ∆T (℃ ) （1-Yh） Hl (°C−1)

Q460-20-BM 263 200 −3 6.4 0.24 0.0375

Q690-10-BM 249 166 − 11 19.3 0.33 0.0171
Q690-20-BM 247 149 − 34 20.6 0.40 0.0194
Q800-30-BM 240 200 − 27 9.5 0.17 0.0179
Q960-10-BM 164 125 − 18 14.4 0.24 0.0167

416
L. Tong et al.
Fig. 11. Macro-feature of specimens of Q460-20-BM.
Fig. 12. Fracture features of impact specimens of Q460-20-BM in 20 °C.
LSE A1 when comparing Q960-10-BM and Q460-20-BM. Q460-20-BM
steel has a higher and unfavorable transition temperature T0 of −3 °C,
while the T0 of Q690-10-BS, Q690-20-BS, Q800-30-BS and Q960-10-BS
brittle transition temperature are −11 °C, −34 °C,-27 °C, −18 °C, re-
spectively. A lower transition temperature is conducive to maintain
better low temperature toughness.
The impact toughness results of HSS of the current study are com-
pared in Fig. 9 with those from previous research on HSS and normal
strength steels [36,39,50,51]. Because of the difference in chemical
composition especially the addition of alloying elements and manu-
facturing process, the impact toughness of HSS are mostly higher than
those of normal strength steels. In the comparison of toughness, it is
necessary to separate HSSs and normal strength steels, and compare
each respectively. The comparison for HSSs are mostly consistent with
our previous analysis. It can be seen that the results of S960 (8 mm
thick) [50] and S690 (12 mm thick) [36] are very closer to those of
Q960-10 and Q690-10 in this paper. The curve of Q960-14 [51] seems
much lower than those of Q960-10 (this paper) and S960-8 [50]. This is
most likely due to the fact that the HSS was manufactured by different
companies with different chemical compositions, manufacturing pro-
cess and different thickness.
6. Fracture mechanism examination of the impact toughness for
HSS
After the Charpy impact tests, fracture surfaces of the specimens
were examined using scanning electron microscope (SEM) to identify
the fracture mechanisms.
6.1. Typical types of impact fracture mechanism
The body-centered cubic (BCC) of HSS materials present a sig-
nificant transformation of fracture modes with the decreasing
417
Thin-Walled Structures 132 (2018) 410–420
temperatures [52,53]. When the testing temperature is higher, the
fracture occurs mainly in a ductile fracture manner (microvoid coa-
lescence MVC) with a higher absorbed energy. The MVC fracture pro-
ceeds in four stages: nucleation, growth, coalescence and propagation
of microvoids, final failure. The schematic diagram is shown in
Fig. 10(a).
When the testing temperature is lower, the brittle mechanism
dominates the fracture mode with a lower absorbed energy. Brittle
fracture (transgranular fracture) shows rapid crack propagation along
cleavage planes of structural weakness, results in a fairly smoother
surface with less sharp edges. Under certain conditions, the fracture
grows along the grain boundaries and results in a fairly jagged looking
fracture with straight edges of the grain and shiny surface (inter-
granular fracture), as shown in Fig. 10(b).
6.2. Macrofeatures of the fracture surface of HSS impact specimens
Most Charpy impact fracture surface consists of a combination of
brittle fracture and ductile fracture. Fig. 11 shows that the fracture
features changed from ductile to brittle with the temperature de-
creasing.
Taking specimen of the Q460-20-BM at the temperature of 20 °C as
an example, as shown in Fig. 12, the optical fracture surface can be
divided into four parts: (a) Prefabricate V-Notch, (b) Fibrous zone, (c)
Radial zone, (d) Shear lip of the final fracture. Each part is corre-
sponding to different fracture features.
The fracture initiated from the fibrous zone in the vicinity of the
prefabricated V-notch. The crack of this region propagates slowly under
triaxial state of stress with equiaxial microvoid coalescence, the surface
is featured with fibrous pattern.
The radial zone is located in the middle of the fracture surface with
a significant granular structure. This region is a mixture of microvoid
coalescence and cleavage fracture. The cracks propagate faster and
smoother in this region. When the testing temperature is higher, the
radial zone is dominated by ductile fracture. While the testing tem-
perature decreases, the fracture mechanism changes into a brittle
cleavage with bright and reflective facets. The shear lip zone also tends
to gradually shrink.
The shear lips zone is the final rupture part and induced by the
shearing stress in the sliding plane.
6.3. Microstructure SEM examination of the fracture surface of HSS impact
specimens
The micro-fracture mechanism analysis has been carried out using
L. Tong et al.
Fig. 13. SEM micrographs at 1000x magnification showing impact fractured surfaces of Q690-10-BM, the lines indicate the dimples or river pattern: (a) 20 °, (b) 0 °,
(c) −20 °, (d)− 40°.
Nova Nano scanning electron microscope SEM450C. The scanning re-
gion is around radial zone near the central part of fracture surface.
There are remarkable changes of microscopic morphology with the
decreasing temperatures. The SEM details with a 1000x magnification
are shown in Figs. 13 and 14 for Q690-10-BM and Q960-10-BM, re-
spectively.
Fig. 13(a) shows that the fracture surface of Q690-10-BM in 20 °C
consisting of much more and uniform dimple structures, which is the
characteristic of ductile fracture. The crack initiation sites for micro-
voids nucleation started and propagated in three dimension scale
around the initiation sites. The dimple cavities are enlarged during
further yielding and the materials between them are necked and
sheared leading to a failure eventually, as observed experimentally. The
depth of these dimples can be considered as a measure of the ductility.
Namely, the ductile dimpled fractures dominated the fracture region for
the Q690D-10-BM at ambient temperature (20 °C).
Fig. 13(d) shows the fracture surface of Q690-10-BM at −40 °C. The
dimple is replaced by much more significant tongues or river patterns
and distinct brittle cleavage steps in the microstructure, which divided
the fracture surface into several large areas. These areas are much
smoother and flatter with little roughness indicating rapid and
smoother crack propagation. The fracture mode is the brittle cleavage
mechanism for Q690-10-BM in a relative lower temperature of −40 °C.
The fracture mechanism of specimens for Q690-10-BM at 0 °C and
−20 °C is a combination or transition of the two fracture types men-
tioned above.
The plastic characteristics of Q960-10-BM microstructures, as
shown in Fig. 14, contains more dimples than that of Q690-10-BM,
which resulted in a lower transition temperature for Q960-10-BM (i.e.
−18 °C as listed in Table 8) than for Q690-10-BM (-11 °C).
418
Thin-Walled Structures 132 (2018) 410–420
7. Conclusions
Impact toughness properties of four kinds of HSS were investigated
with the nominal yield strength of 460, 690, 800 and 960 MPa, re-
spectively. The specialty of impact toughness among base metal, HAZ
and weld metal were also measured and compared. Combined with the
SEM microstructure analysis, the fracture mechanism has been ex-
amined. The following conclusions can be made:
(1) For the HSS base metal, there is a significant degradation in the
impact toughness with the increasing HSS nominal yield strength.
As the testing temperature reduces, the downtrend in impact energy
of HSS narrows. The impact toughness performance of HSS in-
creases slightly with the increase in plate thickness.
(2) For the weld metal of all HSS studied, the impact toughness is al-
ways less than that of the corresponding base metal. It is confirmed
that the heat input during the welding process deteriorates the
toughness performance of the weld metal which becomes the
weakest part in welded structures in terms of fracture-prevention
design at low temperatures. Akv of the weld metal also decreases
with the increasing nominal yield strength of base metal at the same
temperature.
(3) For the HAZ of all HSS studied, the impact toughness is always close
to that of the corresponding base metal, although slightly lower to
some extent. The impact performance of HAZ is discretized due to
significant changes in grain structure as a result of welding thermal
cycling. The Akv of HAZ also decreases with the increasing nominal
yield strength of base metal at the same temperature.
(4) Different welding methods (GMAW-CO2 or SAW) appear to have
little influence on the impact toughness of the weld metal and HAZ.
(5) The microcosmic fracture surface of HSS at ambient temperature
L. Tong et al.
Fig. 14. SEM micrographs at 1000x magnification showing impact fractured surfaces of Q960-10-BM, the lines indicate the dimples or river pattern: (a) 20°, (b) 0°,
(c) −20°, (d)-40°.
consists of much dimple structures which are the characteristic of
ductile fracture. At low temperature (e.g. −40 °C), instead of the
dimple feature, much more significant river patterns and distinct
cleavage steps in the microcosmic surface were observed, which
matches the decline in impact performance.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful for the support from National Natural
Science Foundation of China (No. 51778457) and from the Shanghai
Civil Engineering Peak Discipline Program of Shanghai Municipal
Education Commission (No. TMGFXK-2015).
References
[1] P. Graham, High strength steel use in Australia, Japan & the US, Struct. Eng. 84 (21)
(2006) 27–31.
[2] R. Bjorhovde, Development and use of high performance steel, J. Constr. Steel Res.
60 (3) (2004) 393–400.
[3] H. Ban, G. Shi, A review of research on high-strength steel structures, Struct. Build.
(2017) 1–17.
[4] L. Krüger Grässel, G. Frommeyer, L. Meyer, High strength Fe–Mn–(Al, Si) TRIP/
TWIP steels development-properties-application, Int. J. Plast. 16 (10–11) (2000)
1391–1409.
[5] F. Javidan, A. Heidarpour, X.L. Zhao, J. Minkkinen, Application of high strength
and ultra-high strength steel tubes in long hybrid compressive members: experi-
mental and numerical investigation, Thin-Walled Struct. 102 (2016) 273–285.
[6] K.J.R. Rasmussen, G.J. Hancock, Tests of high strength steel columns, J. Constr.
Steel Res. 34 (1) (1995) 27–52.
[7] T. Usami, Y. Fukumoto, Welded box compression members, J. Struct. Eng. 110 (10)
(1984) 2457–2470.
[8] B. Uy, Axial compressive strength of steel and composite columns fabricated with
high stength steel plate, Adv. Steel Struct. 1 (2) (1999) 421–428.
[9] M.A. Bradford, Y.L. Pi, Nonlinear elastic-plastic analysis of composite members of
high-strength steel and geopolymer concrete, Comput. Model. Eng. Sci. 89 (5)
(2012) 389–416.
[10] F. Azhari, A. Heidarpour, X.L. Zhao, C.R. Hutchinson, Post-fire mechanical response
of ultra-high strength (Grade 1200) steel under high temperatures: linking thermal
419
Thin-Walled Structures 132 (2018) 410–420
stability and microstructure, Thin-Walled Struct. 119 (2017) 114–125.
[11] H. Jiao, X.L. Zhao, Section slenderness limits of very high strength circular steel
tubes in bending, Thin-Walled Struct. 42 (9) (2004) 1257–1271.
[12] L. Lan, C. Qiu, D. Zhao, X. Gao, L. Du, Analysis of microstructural variation and
mechanical behaviors in submerged arc welded joint of high strength low carbon
bainitic steel, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 558 (2012) 592–601.
[13] H. Ghazanfari, M. Naderi, M. Iranmanesh, M. Seydi, A. Poshteban, A comparative
study of the microstructure and mechanical properties of HTLA steel welds obtained
by the tungsten arc welding and resistance spot welding, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 534 (2)
(2012) 90–100.
[14] G. Zhang, X. Yang, X. He, J. Li, H. Hu, Enhancement of mechanical properties and
failure mechanism of electron beam welded 300M ultrahigh strength steel joints,
Mater. Des. 45 (2013) 56–66.
[15] Y. Takashima, M. Ohata, F. Minami, Fracture toughness Evaluation of laser beam-
welded joints of 780 MPa-strength class steel, Weld. World 53 (11–12) (2009)
304–311.
[16] W. Guo, D. Crowther, J.A. Francis, A. Thompson, Z. Liu, L. Li, Microstructure and
mechanical properties of laser welded S960 high strength steel, Mater. Des. 85
(2015) 534–548.
[17] W. Yan, L. Zhu, W. Sha, Y. Shan, K. Yang, Change of tensile behavior of a high-
strength low-alloy steel with tempering temperature, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 517 (1–2)
(2009) 369–374.
[18] M. Ghosh, K. Kumar, R.S. Mishra, Analysis of microstructural evolution during
friction stir welding of ultrahigh-strength steel, Scr. Mater. 63 (8) (2010) 851–854.
[19] D. Dubina, A. Stratan, F. Dinu, Dual high-strength steel eccentrically braced frames
with removable links, Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. 37 (15) (2010) 1703–1720.
[20] Y.B. Wang, G.Q. Li, W. Cui, S.W. Chen, F.F. Sun, Experimental investigation and
modeling of cyclic behavior of high strength steel, J. Constr. Steel Res. 104 (2015)
37–48.
[21] F. Hu, G. Shi, Y. Shi, Constitutive model for full-range elasto-plastic behavior of
structural steels with yield plateau: calibration and validation, Eng. Struct. 118
(2016) 210–227.
[22] H. Jiao, F. Mashiri, X.L. Zhao, Fatigue behavior of very high strength (VHS) circular
steel tube to plate T-joints under in-plane bending, Thin-Walled Struct. 68 (10)
(2013) 106–112.
[23] S. Heinilä, G.B. Marquis, T. Björk, Observations on fatigue crack paths in the corners
of cold-formed high-strength steel tubes, Eng. Fract. Mech. 75 (3) (2008) 833–844.
[24] S.P. Chiew, M.S. Zhao, C.K. Lee, Fatigue performance of high strength steel built-up
box T-joints, J. Constr. Steel Res. 106 (2015) 296–310.
[25] A.M.P.D. Jesus, M. Rui, B.F.C. Fontoura, C. Rebelo, L.S.D. Silva, M. Veljkovic, A
comparison of the fatigue behavior between S355 and S690 steel grades, J. Constr.
Steel Res. 79 (79) (2012) 140–150.
[26] M. Amraei, H. Jiao, X.L. Zhao, L.-W. Tong, Fatigue testing of butt-welded high
L. Tong et al.
strength square hollow sections strengthened with CFRP, Thin-Walled Struct. 120
(2017) 260–268.
[27] J.H. Lee, S.H. Park, H.S. Kwon, G.S. Kim, C.S. Lee, Laser, tungsten inert gas, and
metal active gas welding of DP780 steel: comparison of hardness, tensile properties
and fatigue resistance, Mater. Des. 64 (2014) 559–565.
[28] Y.M. Kim, S.K. Kim, Y.J. Lim, N.J. Kim, Effect of microstructure on the yield ratio
and low temperature toughness of linepipe steels, ISIJ Int. 42 (12) (2002)
1571–1577.
[29] R. Sandström, Y. Bergström, Relationship between Charpy V transition temperature
in mild steel and various material parameters, Metal. Sci. 18 (4) (1984) 177–186.
[30] N. Kosteski, J.A. Packer, R. Puthli, Notch toughness of internationally produced
hollow structural sections, J. Struct. Eng. 131 (2) (2005) 279–286.
[31] N. Stranghoener, J. Krampen, C. Lorenz, Impact toughness behaviour of hot-fin-
ished hollow sections at low temperatures, in: Proceedings of the Twenty-second
International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, International Society of
Offshore and Polar Engineers, Rhodes, Greece, 2012.
[32] J. Barsom, S. Rolfe, Correlations BBetween KIC and CharpY V-notch Test Results in
the Transition-Temperature Range, Impact Testing of Metals, ASTM International,
1970.
[33] G.T. Méndez, S.I.C. Colindres, J.C. Velázquez, D.A. Herrera, E.T. Santillán,
A.Q. Bracarense, Fracture toughness and Charpy CVN ddata for A36 steel with wet
welding, J. Soldag. Insp. 22 (3) (2017) 258–268.
[34] S.Y. Shin, S.Y. Han, S.H. Lee, B.C. Hwang, C.G. Lee, Effect of effective grain size on
Charpy impact properties of high-strength bainitic steels, J. Korean Inst. Met. Mater.
46 (10) (2008) 617–626.
[35] B. Tanguy, J. Besson, R. Piques, A. Pineau, Ductile to brittle transition of an A508
steel characterized by Charpy impact test: PPart I: experimental results, Eng. Fract.
Mech. 72 (1) (2005) 49–72.
[36] A. Bannister, S. Trail, Structural integrity assessment procedures for European in-
dustry, SINTAP, Sub-Tank 3 (3) (1996).
[37] Y.J. Chao, J. Ward Jr, R.G. Sands, Charpy impact energy, fracture toughness and
ductile–brittle transition temperature of dual-phase 590 steel, Mater. Des. 28 (2)
(2007) 551–557.
[38] X.Y. Liu, Y.Q. Wang, L. Zong, Y. Lin, Y.J. Shi, Experimental study on mechanical
properties and toughness of Q460C high-strength steel and its butt welded joint at
low temperature, Int. J. Steel Struct. 14 (3) (2014) 457–469.
[39] Y.Q. Wang, Y. Lin, Y.N. Zhang, Y.J. Shi, Experimental study on fracture toughness
of Q460C the high-strength construction steel at low temperature, Ind. Constr.
71–78 (1) (2012) 890–897.
[40] E. Maina, D. Crowther, J. Banerjee, B. Mintz, Influence of directionality on strength
and impact behaviour of high strength steels, Mater. Sci. Technol. 28 (4) (2012)
420
Thin-Walled Structures 132 (2018) 410–420
390–396.
[41] K. Mori, E. Lee, W. Frazier, K. Niji, G. Battel, A. Tran, E. Iriarte, O. Perez, H. Ruiz,
T. Choi, Effect of tempering and baking on the Charpy impact energy of hydrogen-
charged 4340 steel, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 24 (1) (2015) 329–337.
[42] K. Prasad, D. Dwivedi, Some investigations on microstructure and mechanical
properties of submerged arc welded HSLA steel joints, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol.
36 (5–6) (2008) 475–483.
[43] P. Langenberg, Relation between design safety and Y/T ratio in application of
welded high strength structural steels, in: Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Applications of High Strength Steels in Modern Constructions and
Bridges-Relationship of Design Specifications, Safety and Y/T Ratio, Beijing, China,
2008.
[44] ASTM, Standard test methods and definitions for mechanical testing of steel pro-
ducts, 2012.
[45] CISA, Metallic materials-Charpy pendulum impact test method GB/T 229-2007,
China Iron and Steel Industry Association.
[46] CABP, Code for welding of steel structures GB 50661-2011, China Architecture &
Building Press, 2011.
[47] AWS, Structural welding code-steel, American Welding Society, 1994.
[48] L. Schubert, A.S. Kumar, S.T. Rosinki, M.L. Hamilton, Effect of specimen size on the
impact properties of neutron irradiated A533B steel, J. Nucl. Mater. 225 (1995)
231–237.
[49] A. Garcia-Junceda, M. Hernandez-Mayoral, M. Serrano, Influence of the micro-
structure on the tensile and impact properties of a 14Cr ODS steel bar, Mater. Sci.
Eng. A 556 (2012) 696–703.
[50] W. Guo, L. Li, S. Dong, D. Crowther, A. Thompson, Comparison of microstructure
and mechanical properties of ultra-narrow gap laser and gas-metal-arc welded S960
high strength steel, Opt. Lasers Eng. 91 (2017) 1–15.
[51] Y. Wang, X. Liu, Y. Shi, Experimental study on impact toughness of 960 MPa high-
strength steel and its butt weld at low temperature, J. Build. Mater. 17 (5) (2014)
915–919.
[52] D.W. Rathod, J.A. Francis, M.J. Roy, G. Obasi, N.M. Irvine, Thermal cycle-depen-
dent metallurgical variations and their effects on the through-thickness mechanical
properties in thick section narrow-gap welds, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 707 (2017)
399–411.
[53] D.W. Rathod, P.K. Singh, S. Pandey, S. Aravindan, Effect of buffer-layered buttering
on microstructure and mechanical properties of dissimilar metal weld joints for
nuclear plant application, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 666 (2016) 100–113.
[54] K. Wallin, Master Curve Analysis of Ductile to Brittle Transition Region Fracture
Toughness Round Robin Data (The Euro Fracture Toughness Curve), 367 VTT
Pubications, 1998.