Materials Science and Technology

ISSN: 0267-0836 (Print) 1743-2847 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ymst20

Strengthening mechanisms in high-strength

microalloyed steels

D. T. Gawne & G. M. H. Lewis

To cite this article: D. T. Gawne & G. M. H. Lewis (1985) Strengthening mechanisms in high-
strength microalloyed steels, Materials Science and Technology, 1:3, 183-191, DOI: 10.1179/
mst.1985.1.3.183

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/mst.1985.1.3.183

Published online: 18 Jul 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 26

View related articles

Citing articles: 3 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ymst20

Download by: [Universite Laval] Date: 09 April 2016, At: 04:13

 The mechanisms responsiblefor strengthening a series of high-strength cold-rolled
Strengthening steels with tensile strengths up to 800 MN m - 2 have been investigated. The
mechanisms in magnitude of precipitation strengthening in the annealed steels is shown to be in
agreement with the Orowan-Ashby model for non-deforming particles.
high-strength Strengthening depends only upon the volume fraction and diameter of the
precipitates, and is not influenced by their chemical composition, nor by whether
microalloyed the precipita(ion-hardening elements are added singly or in combination.
steels Manganese alone is a weak solid-solution-strengthening agent, but has a
synergistic effect in combination with titanium or niobium, which is attributed to
its depression of the austenite-ferrite transformation and precipitation
temperatures. Vanadium is a much less efficient strengthening element than
titanium or niobium in annealed steel, owing to the rapid coarsening rate of
vanadium carbonitride precipitates and the considerable loss in strength on
processing from hot-rolled coil to annealed sheet. Sulphur acts to reduce the
strength of the annealed steels and tends to coarsen the grain structure. The
physical basis of this effect is not known, but it is suggested that it may be
associated with the partial solution of managanese sulphide during slab reheating
and its subsequent re-precipitation during hot rolling. Phosphorus and nitrogen
are the most efficient strengthening agents up to tensile strengths of
450 MN m-2, but stronger materials require a combination of strengthening
modes, depending upon the application. MSTj 111

© 1985 The Institute of Metals. Manuscript received 30 August 1984; infinalform

Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 04:13 09 April 2016

16 November 1984. Dr Gawne is in the Department of Materials Technology,

D. T. Gawne BruneI University, Uxbridge, Greater London, and Mr Lewis is with the British
G. M. H. Lewis Steel Corporation, Welsh Laboratories, Port Talbot, West Glamorgan.

partial annealing, and cold work as strengthening

Introduction
There are numerous existing and potential applications for
high-strength steels in the context of producing weight
reductions in the construction, automotive, shipbuilding,
and packaging industries.1-4 The cost advantages vary
with the end product, but, in general, their high strengths
allow a reduction in the thickness of engineering parts,
enabling the user to purchase lower tonnages, and this
more than compensates for their additional unit costs.5
High-strength steels can also make a substantial
contribution to energy efficiency. The motor car, in
particular, is a voracious consumer of energy, and its
improved fuel economy may be achieved either by
improving the operating efficiency of the engine or by a
more efficient design of the vehicle body. The latter option
consists mainly of reducing aerodynamic drag and/or
vehicle weight. The use of high-strength steels allows the
body thickness and weight to be reduced, while
maintaining equivalent dent resistance6 and effective
dynamic elastic modulus.7 The rapid acceptance of high-
strength steels compared with that of alternative weight-
saving materials (e.g. aluminium alloys, structural
polymers) is a result of their low cost penalty per
kilogramme of weight saved2 and their relatively minor
effect on existing manufacturing methods and facilities.
There are a number of different strengthening methods
available for bulk steel production. This paper investigates
solid-solution hardening, precipitation, grain refinement,
mechanisms. A wide range of production and experimental
steels were tested in the laboratory in order to quantify the
contribution of each mechanism to strength and its
relationship with the constituent microstructure. The
technical efficiencies of the major strengthening mech-
anisms are also assessed.
Experimental procedure
The compositions and grain sizes of the steels are given in
Table 1; a total of 70 steels with different chemical
compositions were studied. In general, the materials
consisted of a base composition of a low-carbon mild
steel (0·05-0·1%C, 0·3-1%Mn), to which single alloying
additions of phosphorus (rephosphorized), nitrogen (nitro-
genized), carbon, manganese, silicon, titanium, niobium, or
vanadium were made. The latter materials contained
additions of only one additional alloying element, but a
limited number of steels were examined with multiple
micro alloying additions: four niobium-titanium steels
containing 0·06-0·08%Nb and 0·07-0·10%Ti, and two
niobium-vanadium steels containing 0·04-0·06%Nb and
0·09-0·10%V.
The above steels were subjected to various process
routes, to give a total of 170 finished materials. The steels
were either sampled from hot-rolled coils in the works and

Table 1 Composition and grain-size ranges of experimental steels

Grain
intercept
Composition, wt-% length,
C Si Mn P S Ni AI(sol.) Cu N Nb Sn Ti V Ilm

Mean 0·085 0·051 0'59 0·025 0·017 0·017 0·014 0·020 0·0050 0,072 0·006 0,107 0·103 7·4
Min. 0·046 <0·01 0·25 <0·01 0·008 <0·01 <0·01 <0·01 0·0015 0·018 0·005 0·016 0·011 3·3
Max. 0·220 1·050 1·40 0·287 0·033 0·045 0·063 0·065 0·0256 0·220 0·013 0·197 0·240 13·8

Materials Science and Technology March 1985 Vol. 1 183

 184 Gawne and Lewis Strengthening mechanisms in high-strength
cold rolled and annealed in the laboratory or laboratory
vacuum melted, then fully processed to annealed sheet in
the laboratory. The works hot-rolled steels were slab
. reheated at 1250°C, finished at 900°C, spray cooled, and
coiled at 580°C at a gauge of 2 mm. The laboratory-melted
steels were given a simulation of works hot rolling:
reheating, finishing, and coiling temperatures as above,
spray cooled at 50 K s- 1 on a run-out table with
motorized rollers, and cooled from 580°C at 0·4 K s- 1. All
the hot-rolled steels were cold rolled by 60% to a final
thickness of 0·8 mm on a laboratory mill, using lubrication
and heavy reductions per pass. Simulated batch annealing
was carried out under an argon atmosphere to soaking
temperatures of 660-700°C, using a heating rate of
O·5 K s - 1 and cooling from 700 to 150°C in 48 h.
Simulated continuous-annealing treatments were applied
to selected samples with a radiant furnace, using a heating
rate of 12 K s -1 to soaking temperatures between 715
and 800°C, soaking for 3 min, cooling at 12 K s- 1 to
350°C, holding for 5 min, and cooling at 12 K s -1 to room
temperature.
Tensile testing was carried out in an Instron machine,
using a crosshead speed of 40 Jlm s - 1, with specimens, of
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 04:13 09 April 2016
gauge length and width 50 and 12·5 mm, respectively. The
tensile specimens were cut at 0°, 45°, and 90° to the strip
Tolling direction, and average properties P were obtained
using the equation:
P = !(PO+2P4S+P90) . . . . . . . . . . (1)
where the subscripts refer to the angles between the
direction in which the testpiece was cut and the rolling
direction.
Grain sizes were measured on through-thickness sections
parallel to the rolling direction by the linear intercept
method, using light microscopy. Transmission electron
microscopy was carried out on a Philips 300 instrument.
The precipitates were extracted on carbon replicas from
mid-thickness sections parallel to the rolling plane.
Results and discussion
STRENGTHENING MECHANISMS
Each steel is strengthened by a combination of different
mechanisms. The results presented later in this paper
(Fig. 6), for example, show that a cold-worked mild steel
with a tensile strength of 500 MN m - 2 relies upon
180 MN m -2 from cold-work strengthening and the
remaining base level of 320 MN m - 2 from lattice friction,
solid-solution hardening, grain boundaries, and particle
dispersions. Nevertheless, the dominant structure-sensitive
mechanism in this case is cold work. Similarly, the other
materials will possess one dominant mechanism
responsible for generating the strength increment above the
base level, and this forms the basis of the classification
system used here. Accordingly, the solid-solution-hardened
materials consist of the rephosphorized, nitrogenized,
manganese, and silicon steels; the precipitation-hardened
materials of the titanium, niobium, and vanadium steels;
the grain-refined materials of the carbon-manganese steels;
the partially annealed materials of the titanium, niobium,
and vanadium steels annealed below their recrystallization
temperatures; and the cold-worked materials of the
as-cold-rolled aluminium-killed mild steel rolled by various
amounts up to 70% reduction. In practice, each material is
strengthened by more than one mechanism, but, to a first
approximation, the strengthening mechanisms may be
considered to be additive, such that the yield strength (Jy is
given by:
(2)
Materials Science and Technology March 1985 Vol. 1
steels
where (Jo is the lattice friction stress and (Js, (Jp, (Jg, and (Jf.
are the respective strength increments produced by solid-
solution hardening, precipitate particles, grain boundaries,
and dislocations .
Solid-solution hardening
The effect of phosphorus, nitrogen, manganese, silicon,
carbon, and grain size on the strength of a series of
rephosphorized, nitrogenized, silicon, carbon-manganese,
and rimmed steels (batch and continuously annealed) was
examined. The carbon was mostly in the form of cementite
particles, which produce strengthening by precipitation
hardening and grain refinement. The following equations
for the nominal yield strength (Jy (MN m - 2) and nominal
tensile strength (Jt (MN m - 2), in terms of steel composition
and grain size, were obtained from a statistical analysis of
the data:
(Jy = 27 + 22d-1/2 + 165 x %C +470 x %P
+3000 x %N +60x %Si-665 x %S . (3)
(Jt = 150+ 16d-1/2+355 x %C+600 x %P
+4505 x %N + 77 x %Si-845 x %S . (4)
where d represents the grain intercept length (mm) and the
element concentrations are in weight per cent. Equations
(3) and (4) both explained 91% of the observed variations.
More approximate equations can be derived from the
results when the grain-size data are omitted from the
analysis. Such equations are useful in practice for a
specified process route, when the grain size is unknown and
predictions of the total strengthening effects of the elements
are required. The total strengthening effect obtained from
these equations is the strength increment produced by any
grain-refining action of the element, in addition to its
solution-hardening contribution - and its precipitation-
hardening effect in the case of carbon. The equations
depend upon the composition of a steel controlling the
grain size, and this can only hold for a fixed process
route, since process variables can alter the grain size
independently. The following equations give the strength of
the steels batch annealed at temperatures between 660 and
700°C, in terms of composition only:
(Jy = 246+512 x %C+540 x %P+3935 x %N
+ 68 x %Si- 2174 x %S . . . . .. (5)
(Jt = 292+563 x %C+678 x %P+5183 x %N
+90 x %Si+ 18 x %Mn-1534 x %S.. (6)
Equations (5) and (6) explain 72% and 83% of the observed
variation, respectively. As indicated above, the concen-
trations of the elements affect the grain size, and this effect
changes the values of the strengthening coefficients in
equations (5) and (6), relative to those in equations (3)
and (4).
The results of the current work and those reported in the
literature on the strengthening effects of alloying elements
in steel are summarized in Table 2. Differences in
processing conditions are probably the major cause of the
differences between the various sets of data. For example,
Wilson 17 found ,that the cooling rate has a pronounced
effect on ky in a low-carbon steel annealed at 700°C.
Cooling slowly from the annealing temperature to allow
the carbon to segregate to the grain boundaries gave
ky = 23 MN m-2 mm1/2, whereas quenching resulted in a
value of ky that was only 10 MN m-2 mm1/2• Wilson
interpreted his results on the basis of Li's theory18 that
yield is controlled by the ability to propagate dislocations
from grain boundaries: increasing the impurity content
(especially carbon) at grain boundaries stabilizes grain
boundary ledges, which act as dislocation donors, and
thereby raises kyo The values of ky for the batch-annealed
steels in Table 2 (19·5,22, and 23 MN m-2 mm1/2) cover a
 Gawne and Lewis Strengthening mechanisms in high-strength steels 185

Table 2 Strengthening produced by 1 wt-% increase in alloying element

Strengthening produced by 1% solute (excluding grain Total strengthening produced by 1% solute

size effect), MN m-2 (including grain size effect), MN m-2
Current Current
Element work Ref. 8 Ref. 9 Ref. 10 Ref. 11 Ref. 12 work Ref. 13 Ref. 14 Ref. 15 Ref. 16

C Yield stress 165 0 512 382

Tensile stress 355 525 563 460 441
P Yield stress 470 371 680 540 400
Tensile stress 600 865 678 680 930
N Yield stress 2998 2779 5000 1540 3935 8600
Tensile stress 4505 4014 5183
Si Yield stress 60 82 84 83 68 55
Tensile stress 77 148 90 98 110
Mn Yield stress 0 34 32 43 0 22
Tensile stress 0 68 18 64 46
S Yield stress -664 -216 -2174
Tensile stress -845 -340 -1534
kv*, MN m-2 mm112 Yield stress 22 21·6 19·5 23 18·1 15-4
Tensile stress 16 17·0 8·8
(Jot, MN m-2
Yield stress 27 51 70 105 246 247
Tensile stress 150 232 292 294 270

* Coeff. of d-1h in regression equations (see equations (3) and (4».

t Intercept in regression equations (see equations (3)-(6».
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 04:13 09 April 2016

higher range than those of the hot-rolled steels (15'4, 18'1,
and 21·6 MN m-2 mm1/2). This may also be due to Li's
mechanism, since the cooling rate of batch-annealed steels
is usually lower than that of hot-rolled coil, owing to the
high thermal mass of the annealing furnace and the close
proximity of the coils. In the current work, for instance, the
average cooling rate for the batch-annealed steel was
0·18 K s -1, while the hot-rolled steel experienced 50 K S-1
down to 580°C and 0·4 K s - 1 thereafter. The annealing
temperature, carbide distribution, alloying element concen-
trations, interactions between elements, grain structure,
etc., are also expected to influence the segregation of
carbon and other elements to grain boundaries, hence
causing variations in the mechanical-property parameters.
Carbon has a strong grain-refining action, since
cementite particles nucleate recrystallized grains19,2o and
pin grain boundaries. As a result, the strength coefficients
for carbon vary markedly, depending upon whether or not
the grain size is omitted from the regression analysis, e.g.
the coefficient increases from 165 in equation (3) to 512 in
equation (5) (see also Table 2). The carbon content in sheet
steel for the automotive industry is normally limited by
weldability requirements13,21 to a maximum of ",0'12%.
In practice, this allows increases in carbon content of up to
0'05% over existing extra-deep-drawing (EDD) steel, which,
on the basis of Table 2, will generate increases in yield
strength of up to '" 25 MN m - 2. The strengthening
available from increasing the carbon content, therefore, is
relatively small.
The results in Table 2 show that phosphorus is an
effective strengthening agent in steel, the addition of 1%P
raising the yield strength by '" 500 MN m - 2. The
relationship between the tensile strength of the hot-rolled
coil and that of the corresponding annealed sheet for the
solution-hardened steels is shown in Fig. 1; the equivalent
plots for the precipitation-hardened, grain-refined, and
partially annealed steels are shown in Fig. 2. The results
show that phosphorus, along with the other solid-solution
hardeners, produces· little loss of strength on processing
from hot-rolled coil to annealed sheet, compared with the
alloying additions to the precipitation-hardened and grain-
refined steels. This effect provides rephosphorized steels
with a major advantage over the other steel types, since
lower rolling-mill loads are required to produce an
annealed steel of a given strength. As may also be seen
from Figs. 1 and 2, continuous annealing is particularly
efficient in this respect, because its short annealing cycle
gives rises to a fine grain structure. A further advantage of
rephosphorized steels lies in their relatively high ductilities
at high strength levels.22 However, excessively high
phosphorus contents can be detrimental to product
properties: in particular, contents above 0'1-0'2%, the
precise limit depending upon the application, are
undesirable because of their effect on weldability23 and
brittleness. 13, 24 Studies of spot weldability in the
automotive industry, for example, indicated a maximum of
0'16% for the combined phosphorus and carbon contents.2
There is thus a limit to the use of phosphorus as a
strengthening agent, but additions below the particular
product ceiling represent an attractive method of raising
the yield strength by up to 50-100 MN m-2•
Nitrogen appears to be the most potent strengthener of
all the elements investigated (Table 2) and also produces
steels with good formability in the as-annealed condition.22
Further increases in strength are obtained by strain aging
after temper rolling and press forming. However, there are
certain reservations regarding the use of nitrogen. First,
variable recoveries in steelmaking and nitrogen losses
during subsequent processing can result in inconsistent
nitrogen contents in the finished product. An associated
problem is the difficulty in maintaining high nitrogen
contents, although this can be alleviated in part by
additional care in process control, e.g. batch-annealing
temperatures should be kept below about 650°C. Second,
the strain-aging process can bring disadvantages. The
strain in a pressed part can vary markedly with position,
and so, therefore, will the strengthening produced by strain
aging. In addition, strain aging increases the yield strength
much more than the tensile strength, thus producing a
pronounced rise in the yield-strengthjtensile-strength ratio.
In adverse circumstances, these factors seem likely to
weaken the resistance of a finished component to collapse.
Silicon and manganese are both shown to be relatively
weak strengthening elements (Table 2). They appear to be
more effective in hot-rolled steel,8, 11, 12 possibly because of
their influence on the austenite-ferrite phase trans-
formation during hot rolling and the resulting grain
structure and carbide morphology. Large concentrations of
silicon and manganese are necessary to generate relatively
small strength increases, and so these elements are not
attractive strengthening options in sub-critically annealed
steels.
The effect of sulphur is striking, as it is the only element
that reduces the strength of annealed steel; a similar effect
has been observed by Gladman et al.8 in hot-rolled steels
(Table 2). There is a large stoichiometric excess of

Materials Science and Technology March 1985 Vol. 1

 186 Gawne and Lewis Strengthening mechanisms in high-strength steels

N
IE
/
~ 700
1-- /
W
W
I /
.(1)

fa 600 /
-I
« /
W CONTINUOUSLY
Z ANNEALED
z
«
LL
500
o
I
l-
e!) BATCH
a:i 400 ANNEALED
a:
I-
(j)

W
-I /
Ci5 300
z /
W
I-
/
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 04:13 09 April 2016

200 300 400 500 600 700

TENSI LE STRENGTH OF HOT ROLLED STEEL, MN m-2

Relationship between tensile strength. of hot-rolled steel and that of subsequent annealed steel for solution-
hardened materials

manganese over sulphur in all the steels, in order to avoid hardening. However, Table 2 indicates that manganese in
hot shortness, and so any increase in sulphur content solution has little significant influence on strength, and so
produces a decrease in the amount of manganese in this is unlikely to explain the effect. There is some
solution and a corresponding reduction in solid-solution indication from that data that increasing the sulphur

800
/
/
C\J
/
IE 700
/
z
2: /
t-='
w /
W
I
600
(f)

o
W
....J
«
W
Z
500
z
«
u...
o V-SA
I
t- 400
(!)
Z
W
a:
t-
(f)
BA = BATCH ANNEALED
W 300
....J / CA = CONTINUOUSLY ANNEALED
CI5 Ti-BA
Z
W / PA = PARTIALLY ANNEALED
t-

200 300 400 500 600 700 800

TENSI LE STRENGTH OF HOT ROLLED STEEL, MN m-2

2 Relationship between tensile strength of hot-rolled steel and that of subsequent annealed steel for precipitation-
hardened materials

Materials Science and Technology March 1985 Vol. 1

 Gawne and Lewis Strengthening mechanisms in high-strength steels 187

content tends to coarsen the grain structure (e.g. the

strengthening coefficient for sulphur becomes markedly
more'negative when the grain size is omitted from the
regression analysis, as shown by equations (3) and (5) and
Table 2). The physical basis of the effect of sulphur on
strength is not clear, but a possible explanation is as
follows. The sulphur content varies from 0·008 to 0·033%
in the steels tested (Table 1), and this will increase the
volume fraction of manganese sulphide inclusions (in direct
proportion, owing to the stoichiometric excess of
manganese), consequently decreasing their inter-particle
spacing. The manganese sulphide inclusions will be
partially dissolved during slab reheating, and the resulting
excess manganese and sulphur in solution will precipitate
as a fine dispersion, probably during hot rolling. This fine
manganese sulphide dispersion is expected to refine the
grain structure in the hot-rolled and annealed states.
However, this grain-refining effect is expected to be much
less pronounced in the high-sulphur steels, because their a
smaller inter-particle spacing encourages re-precipitation
back on to the existing manganese sulphide inclusions,
rather than the formation of a fine dispersion between
them.
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 04:13 09 April 2016

Precipitation hardening
Titanium, niobium, and vanadium were used singly and in
combination as precipitation-hardening elements. Titanium
forms coarse dispersions of a nitride and a carbo sulphide,
together with a fine carbide dispersion - the volume
fraction of the latter may be estimated from the data of
Meyer et a1.25 Niobium and vanadium form fine
precipitate dispersions of carbonitrides, the compositions
and volume fractions of which may be estimated from the
data of Meyer,26-28 Mandry and Dornelas,29 and Hudd
et al.30 Examples of the precipitate dispersions in these
steels are shown in Fig. 3.
An experimental value of the precipitation-hardening b
component may be obtained from equations (2) and (3).
Equation (2) can be rearranged to give:
(J"p = (J"y-(J"o-(J"s-(J"g-(J"e • • • • (7)
and equating equations (2) and (3) provides:
(J"o = 27
(J"s = 165 x %C+470 x %P+3000 x %N +60 x %Si
-665 x %S
(J"g = 22d-1/2
The steels under consideration were fully recrystallized, and
so the value of the dislocation-hardening component is
practically zero:
(J"e=O

Substitution of these values into equation (7) gives an

experimental value of the precipitation-hardening com-
C
ponent (J"p, expt of the nominal yield strength (MN m - 2)
of a steel in terms of its experimentally measured yield a titanium carbide; b niobium carbonitride; c vanadium carbonitride
strength (J"y (MN m - 2), grain size d (mm), and chemical 3 Electron micrographs showing precipitate dis-
composition (wt-%): persions in high-strength cold-rolled steels x 48000

(J"p,expt = (J"y-27-22d-1/2-165 X %C-470 x %P

-3000 x %N -60 x %Si+665 x %S..
The value of (J"p (MN m - 2) may also be obtained
theoretically from the Orowan-Ashby equation, 31,32 which
for ferritic steels is:
(J"p, theor = (8·9/1/2/x)ln(1630x) . . . . . . . .
where x (~m) and / are the mean three-dimensional
diameter and volume fraction of the particles, respectively.
X-I is the dominant function of x in equation (9), and so
precipitation strengthening increases with decreasing
particle size and increasing volume fraction. The
(8) quantitative relationship for ferritic steels, as derived from
equation (9), is shown in Fig. 4.
The values of (J"p, expt were calculated from equation (8),
using the experimentally measured values of the yield
strength and grain size. The mean precipitate diameters
(9) were measured in the TEM and used to obtain (J"p,theor from
equation (9). The data on the hot-rolled and annealed
precipitation-hardened steels are summarized in Fig. 5, in
which it is shown that the theoretical values of (J"p are in
broad agreement with the experimental ones, thus
confirming the validity of the strengthening model adopted.

Materials Science and Technology March 1985 Vol. 1

 188 Gawne and Lewis Strengthening mechanisms in high-strength steels

C\l
I
E
z
2:
~ 0
I- pptdia.,A
z
UJ
100
20
Z
30
0 40
0-
:E 50
0 75
u
100
0
Z
-
Z
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 04:13 09 April 2016

UJ

I 250
I-

0
Z
UJ 500
a:::
I-
t/) 10
I 750
Z 1000
a
I-

4:
I-

~
u 2500
UJ
a:::
0-

5000

a
0·0001 0·001 0·01

VOLUME FRACTION OF PRECIPITATE (f)

4 Contribution of precipitation hardening to yield strength of steels, and its variation with precipitate size

This agreement is similar to that found by other workers
for hot-rolled steels.33,34 In addition, strengthening is
shown to depend only on the volume fraction and diameter
of the precipitates - providing they are non-deforming -
and is not influenced by their chemical composition (i.e.
whether they are titanium carbide or niobium or vanadium
carbonitride) nor by whether the alloying elements are
added singly or in combination. For example, the use of
titanium or vanadium in conjunction with niobium gave
no noticeable advantage in terms of strength over that
expected from the equivalent extra addition of niobium in
a plain niobium steel. It is pointed out, however, that
multiple microalloying additions may make a useful
contribution to high-strength steels for other reasons. For
instance, niobium carbonitride has a relatively low
solubility in iron and requires high solution temperatures.
The concentration of niobium taken into solution, and thus
the resulting volume fraction of fine niobium carbonitride
precipitates and the consequent strengthening contribu-
tion, are, therefore, limited by commercial slab-reheating
temperatures. Irvine35 proposed that this limitation could
be overcome by the use of more than one precipitating
element, since this would lead to .a greater total
concentration of dissolved elements being available for
precipitation than if only one had been used. His results
showed that the addition of vanadium to niobium steels
significantly increased the strength of the hot-rolled
product, in accordance with this mechanism.
The precipitation and grain-refinement contributions
vary throughout processing. In the as-hot-rolled
laboratory-melted titanium steels, for instance, the
precipitates contributed '" 130 MN m - 2 and the grain
structure 200 MN m - 2 to a measured yield strength of
410 MN m-2• In the batch-annealed condition, however,
the precipitation-hardening component fell to 60 MN m - 2,
owing to particle coarsening, whereas that of the grain
structure remained at 200 MN m - 2, for a measured yield
strength of 360 MN m - 2. It is noted that, although the
precipitation-hardening component may be less than that
of the grain structure, the precipitates exert a crucial,
indirect effect on strength through their refinement of the
grain structure.
The relationship between the strength of the hot-rolled
steel and that of the subsequent annealed sheet is shown in
Fig. 2. The batch-annealed titanium, niobium, and carbon-
manganese steels show similar behaviour, but the
batch-annealed vanadium steels exhibit substantially lower
strengths in the annealed condition for a given hot-rolled
steel strength. This is directly related to the fact that
vanadium carbonitride precipitates coarsened much more
quickly than titanium· carbide or niobium carbonitride
precipitates. The strength of vanadium steels falls relatively

Materials Science and Technology March 1985 Vol. 1

 Gawne and Lewis Strengthening mechanisms in high-strength steels 189

/
/ •
N
'I
E200 /
Z
2:
..-...
/
u
rou /
bci"
"-" 150
Z
o
•....
::l o
co 00 /
~•....
z
•
/
8 100
• o •
o
w
•....
o 0/ •.
4: A AD. /0
...J
::l A ./. A

~ o • •
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 04:13 09 April 2016

4:
u
50
~.h. • - Ti
o - Nb
Steels
Steels
/ A - V Steels

/
o 50 100 150 200 250

EXPERIMENTAL CONTRIBUTION (Up ,~xPt),MNm-2

5 Comparison of experimentally measured and theoretically calculated precipitation-hardening contributions in

titanium, niobium, and vanadium steels

rapidly, therefore, -as processing proceeds. Hence, whereas of secondary recrystallization. The final recrystallized grain
satisfactory strength levels may be maintained in hot-rolled size is, therefore, expected to be a multiple of the
steels after coiling at low temperatures (e.g. 580°C), the dislocation cell size. The cell size in low-carbon steel cold
strength after prolonged batch annealing is low. The rolled by about 60% varies with crystallographic orienta-
practical implication of this is that vanadium is a relatively tion,36 but is normally in the range 0·5-2'0 /lm within the
inefficient strengthening agent for high-strength annealed matrix and ",0,2 Jlm within microbands.37,38 The smallest
steels; a relatively high hot-rolled steel strength, which grain size observed in the steels under investigation was
incurs high rolling-mill loads, is required for a given just over 3 /lm (Table 1) and, in view of the above
strength level in the annealed condition. mechanism of grain structure formation, this is likely to be
The production hot-rolled titanium and niobium steels close to the minimum grain size possible in these materials.
were stronger, by '" 50 MN m - 2, than their laboratory- Equations (3) and (4) indicate, therefore, that the maximum
melted counterparts. Their high strength levels are yield and tensile strengths achievable by grain refinement
attributed mainly to their higher manganese contents alone in these materials are '" 450 and '" 500 MN m - 2,
('" 1%, compared with 0'3%). Precipitation in titanium and respectively.
niobium steels is likely to occur mainly during the
austenite-ferrite transformation during· hot rolling. High
manganese contents lower the transformation temperature, EFFECT OF TEMPER ROLLING ON
and thus the precipitation temperature, which is expected PROPERTIES
to result in a finer precipitate dispersion and a higher The materials in the current investigation were tested in the
strength.33 Thus, although manganese alone is a relatively as-annealed condition, whereas commercial steels are
ineffective strengthening agent, it appears to have a usually temper rolled by about 1% for reasons of strip
synergistic effect in combination with titanium or niobium. shape and surface texture, and to avoid stretcher-strain
markings in pressed parts. A limited evaluation on the
Grain refinement effect of temper reduction on properties was carried out in
The relative importance of the grain-refinement component the laboratory.
of the strength is greatest in the carbon-manganese steels, After temper rolling by 1% on a laboratory mill, the
because of their relatively low precipitation-hardening (a yield strength of five nitrogenized steels (as-annealed yield
result of the coarse cementite particles - 0'6 Jlm dia.) and strength 280 MN m - 2) fell by 50-75 MN m - 2, the fall for
solution-hardening contributions. The cementite particles four rephosphorized steels (as-annealed yield strength
do, however, exert a major, indirect influence on strength, 300 MN m - 2) was 40-65 MN m - 2, and that for a titanium
through their grain-refining action, and so carbon content steel (as-annealed yield strength 400 MN m - 2) was
is still an important control variable. 65 MN m - 2. The corresponding fall in n for these steels
The grain structure develops initially by recrystalliza- varied from 0·020 to 0·055. In principle, the property
tion, which involves the growth of dislocation cells in the changes on temper rolling are expected to be influenced by
deformation substructure by a mechanism similar to that factors such as interstitial content, work-hardening rate,

Materials Science and Technology March 1985 Vol. 1

 190 Gawne and Lewis Strengthening mechanisms in high-strength steels

and grain size, but no significant differences were detected
between the steels examined. On average, therefore, the
yield strength of high-strength cold-rolled steels falls by
60 MN m - 2 and n by 0·035 on temper rolling by 1%. In
1"0.1
comparison, an aluminium-killed EDD mild steel (as-
annealed yield strength 225 MN m - 2) exhibited a fall in
yield strength of 50 MN m - 2 and in n of
1"0.1 0·03 on
temper rolling by 1%.
COMPARISON OF STRENGTHENING
METHODS
Figure 6 is a composite diagram plotted from the data
obtained, in which the effect of the principal mechanisms
on the strengths of batch-annealed steels is shown. The
curve for cold work refers to a low-carbon mild steel.
Vanadium is ineffective as a strengthening agent, because
of the rapid coarsening rate of vanadium carbonitride
precipitates. Vanadium also incurs the disadvantage that
high strength levels in the hot-rolled condition, and hence
high rolling-mill loads, are required for moderate strengths
in the annealed sheet (Fig. 2). The titanium, niobium, and
carbon-manganese steels are more efficient in this respect
(Fig. 2), while the solution-hardened steels are the most
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 04:13 09 April 2016
relatively weak hot-rolled steel with minimal alloying
additions (Figs. 1 and 2).
Solid-solution-hardening elements are useflil strength-
ening agents up to tensile strengths of 400-450 MN m - 2,
since they minimize rolling-mill loads, maximize duc-
tility,22 and, unlike precipitation hardeners, are relatively
1"0.1 insensitive to variations in slab-reheating temper-
ature. The last factor could become significant with the
trend towards fast hot mills with lower slab-reheating
temperatures. Nevertheless, tensile strengths of above
400-450 MN m - 2 require unacceptably high alloying
concentrations, in terms of weldability and impact
properties. Stronger materials can be made by a
combination of strengthening modes, depending upon the
application. When maximum ductility is required at a high
strength level, for instance, solid-solution hardening may
be combined with precipitation hardening. Conversely, a
combination of precipitation hardening and cold work is a
relatively inexpensive strengthening mechanism for very-
high-strength, low-ductility applications.
The microstructure necessary for the operation of each
mechanism can be obtained by suitable control of
composition and processing. There are numerous combin-
ations of methods to achieve a given strength level.

attractive, as they lose little strength on processing from The choice of production route will depend upon the
the hot rolled to the annealed condition (Fig. 1). intended product application and required material
Continuous annealing minimizes precipitate and grain properties, tonnages, availability of equipment, production
coarsening, and offers distinct advantages over batch costs, and compatibility. Production compatibility is of
annealing for high-strength steel production, since a given major importance in defining a process route for a new
strength in the annealed sheet can be derived from a product in existing steelworks. The manufacture of the

Cold
Work ./p
500
/
Nb
/
Ti
/.
//
450 /.
//
')I /.
//
E //
z /.
2: ~
/.
I
I- 400 ~.
~ /C
0
z /
UJ
0:::
l-
V) :I
~. Si /
UJ
-oJ
/ V

350
V)

Z
W
I-

300

10 20 30
COLD REDUCTION 1 °10
2 3
Mn,Si
0-10 0·20 0·30
Nb,Ti, V) P, N, C
CONCENTRATION OF ALLOYING ELEMENT,wt-olo
6 Effect of alloying elements and cold reduction on tensile strength of steel (cold reduced 600/0,batch annealed at
700°C for 20 h); cold-work curve is for low-carbon mild steel

Materials Science and Technology March 1985 Vol. 1

 Gawne and Lewis
product should adopt as closely as possible the existing
equipment and practices of the run-of-the-mill materials for
a particular works. High-strength copper steels,21 for
example, which require an additional heat treatment after
cold reduction, would be at a serious practical
dis,advantage in this respect. Additional process control
will inevitably be required, even for high-strength steels
produced by existing manufacturing methods. For
example, the addition of alloying elements incurs extra heat
losses during secondary steelmaking, higher hot-mill loads
because of the accumulation of incomplete recrystallization
during rolling, higher cold-mill loads, and higher soak
temperatures to ensure recrystallization during annealing.
The production costs of high-strength steels will thus be
higher than those of mild steel, and this, together with the
fact that high-strength steel is a cannibalistic product, in
the sense that it replaces mild steel and reduces output, will
clearly act to raise its price band above that of mild steel.
Conclusions
Downloaded by [Universite Laval] at 04:13 09 April 2016
1. Phosphorus and nitrogen are the most effective solid-
solution-hardening elements, and also give practically no
loss in strength on processing from hot-rolled coil to
annealed sheet.
2. Vanadium is an inefficient strengthening agent in
annealed steel, owing to the rapid coarsening rate of
vanadium carbonitride and the considerable loss in
strength on processing from hot-rolled coil to annealed
strip.
3. Titanium and niobium are effective precipitation
hardeners, capable of producing high strength levels in
batch-annealed steels.
4. Precipitation strengthening in the annealed steels is in
agreement with the Orowan-Ashby model. Strengthening
depends only upon the volume fraction and diameter of the
precipitates, and is not influenced by their chemical
composition, nor by whether the precipitation-hardening
elements are added singly or in combination with one
another.
5. Manganese alone is a weak strengthening agent, but
has a synergistic effect in combination with titanium or
niobium, which is attributed to its depression of the
austenite-ferrite transformation and precipitation temper-
atures.
6. Increases in the sulphur content reduce the strength of
the annealed steels and tend to coarsen the grain structure.
The physical basis of this effect is not known, but it is
suggested that it may be associated with the partial
solution of manganese sulphide during slab reheating and
subsequent re-precipitation during hot rolling.
7. Temper rolling by 1% reduces the yield strengths and
work-hardening exponents of high-strength cold-rolled
steels by '" 60 MN m - 2 and '" 0·035, respectively. There
were no systematic differences in the magnitude of this
effect between the various steels.
Acknowledgment
The work was carried out at the Welsh Laboratory, British
Steel Corporation, Port Talbot, West Glamorgan, and the
authors wish to thank the British Steel Corporation for
permission to publish this paper.
Strengthening mechanisms in high-strength steels 191
References
1. G. H. WALTER: in 'Microalloying '75', 622; 1977, New York,
Union Carbide Corp.
2. P. BEARDMORE: Mater. Eng., 1981, 2, 250.
3. A. B. HABERFIELD and R. c. HUDD: Metall. Mater. Technol.,
1982, 14, 405.
4. L. ZUB and A. COLELLO: SAE Reprint 800215, Society of
Automotive Engineers, Dearborn, Mich., 1980.
5. G. SENEVIRATNE: Development Forum, Business Edition, 1983,
(131).
6. J. A. DiCELLO and R. A. GEORGE: SAE Paper 740081, Society of
Automotive Engineers, Dearborn, Mich., 1974.
7. D. KASPER: SAE Paper 79003, Society of Automotive
Engineers, Dearborn, Mich., 1979.
8. T. GLADMAN, B. HOLMES, and F. B. PICKERING: J. Iron Steel
Inst., 1970, 208, 172.
9. R. W. EVANS: J. Iron Steel Inst., 1967, 205, 1150.
10. K. TODA, H. GONDOH, H. TAKECHI, and H. MASUI: Metall. Trans.,
1976, 7A, 1629.
11. w. B. MORRISON, B. MINTZ, and R. C. COCHRANE: Proc. Product
Technology Conf. on 'Controlled processing of HSLAsteels',
York University, 1976, British Steel Corporation, Preprint
Paper NO.1.
12. B. MINTZ, W. B. MORRISON, and A. JONES: Met. Technol., 1979,
6,252.
13. T. MATSUOKA and K. YAMAMORI: Me tall. Trans., 1975, 6A,
1613.
14. S. HAYAMI and T. FURUKAWA: in 'Micro alloying '75', 311; 1977,
New York, Union Carbide Corp.
15. B. S. LEVEY: Proc. Automotive Engineering Congr., Detroit,
Mich., Jan. 1972, SAE Preprint 720017.
16. T. MATSUOKA and K. YAMAMORI: in Proc. Materials
Engineering Congr. on 'Metallurgical aspects in cold rolled
high strength sheet steels', Chicago, Ill., Oct. 1973, American
Society for Metals, American Institute of Mining, Metal-
lurgical and Petroleum Engineers.
17. D. V. WILSON: Met. Sci. J., 1967, 1, 40.
18. J. c. M. LI: Trans. AIME, 1963, 227, 239.
19. D. T. GAWNE and G. T. HIGGINS: J. Mater. Sci., 1971, 6, 403.
20. D. T. GAWNE and G. T. HIGGINS: in 'Textures in research and
practice', 319; 1969, Berlin, Springer-Verlag.
21. P. R. MOULD: Met. Eng. Q., Aug. 1975, 15, (3), 22.
22. D. T. GAWNE and G. M. H. LEWIS: Mater. Sci. Techno!., 1985, 1,
(2), 128.
23. K. ARAKI, S. FUKUNAKA, and K. UCHIDA: Trans. Iron Steel Inst.
Jpn, 1977, 17, 701.
24. K. NAKAOKA, K. ARAKI, Y. TAKADA, and J. NOSE: NKK Tech.
Rep. Overseas, Sept. 1978, 23.
25. L. MEYER, F. HEISTERKAMP, and D. LAUTERBORN: 'Processing
and properties of low carbon steel', 297; 1973, New York,
Metallurgical Society of AIME.
26. L. MEYER: Z. Metallkd., 1967, 58, 334.
27. L. MEYER: Dissertation, Technische UniversiHit Clausthal,
1966.
28. L. MEYER: Z. Metallkd., 1967, 58, 396.
29. P. MANDRY and w. DORNELAS: Compt. Rend., 1966, 263, 1118.
30. R. C. HUDD, A. JONES, and M. N. KALE: J. Iron Steel Inst., 1971,
209, 121.
31. E. OROWAN: in 'Symposium on internal stresses in metals and
alloys', 451; 1948, London, The Institute of Metals (in
discussion).
32. M. F. ASHBY: in 'Oxide dispersion strengthening', 143; 1958,
New York, Metallurgical Society of AIME.
33. T. GLADMAN, B. HOLMES, and I. D. McIVOR: in 'Effect of second-
phase particles on the mechanical properties of steel', 68;
1971, London, The Iron and Steel Institute.
34. T. GLADMAN, D. DULlEU, and I. D. McIVOR: in 'Microalloying
'75',32; 1977, New York, Union Carbide Corp.
35. K. J. IRVINE: in 'Heat treatment of metals', 37; 1966, London,
The Iron and Steel Institute.
36. c. J. E. SMITH and I. L. DILLAMORE: Met. Sci. J., 1970, 4, 161.
37. R. L. AGHAN and J. NUTTING: Met. Sci., 1980, 14, 233.
38. R. L. AGHAN and J. NUTTING: Met. Technol., 1981,8,41.
Materials Science and Technology March 1985 Vol. 1