Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Scripta Materialia 59 (2008) 1014–1017

www.elsevier.com/locate/scriptamat

Geometry of dimples and its correlation with mechanical

properties in austenitic stainless steel
Arpan Das* and Soumitra Tarafder
Fatigue & Fracture Group, Materials Science & Technology Division, National Metallurgical Laboratory
(Council of Scientific & Industrial Research), Jamshedpur 831 007, India
Received 21 May 2008; revised 5 July 2008; accepted 7 July 2008
Available online 18 July 2008

Two-dimensional dimple geometry and the distribution of dimple features (i.e. diameter and density) quantified from tensile
fractographs are observed to predict the nature of the variation in mechanical properties with strain rate.
Ó 2008 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: 304LN stainless steel; Dimple diameter; Dimple density; Image processing; Strain rate

Fracture is, often, the culmination of continued
deformation processes. Therefore, fracture surfaces
may retain signatures of the deformation processes that
a material has been subjected to. This study explores the
correlation between fracture features and deformation
properties in AISI 304LN stainless steel in order to
establish the close association between deformation
and fracture.
The micromechanism of ductile fracture involves the
initiation, growth and coalescence of microvoids [1,2].
Voids initiate from inclusions, precipitates, second-
phase particles, etc., in the metallic matrix and grow un-
der the influence of hydrostatic stress and plastic strain
[1–5]. The deformation characteristics of a material con-
trol the nucleation of voids, their subsequent growth
and the ultimate coalescence of the most mature voids
at fracture. The distribution, size and coherency of crit-
ical constituents of the microstructure play an important
role in the process leading to eventual fracture [6–10].
The correlation of fracture properties and fracture fea-
tures to the quantum and quality of void-initiating par-
ticles has been sought and established [11,12]. Rice and
Tracy [13] have given a cogent analysis of void growth.
Rice and Johnson [14] have examined the growth behav-
iour of an isolated spherical void. McMeeking [15]
investigated spherical void growth ahead of a blunting
crack tip and summarized various experimental results
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +91 657 2271709; e-mail: dasarpan1@
yahoo.co.in
on the effects of void spacing and size on the critical
crack tip opening displacement at fracture initiation.
Deformation paths at various strain rates would con-
trol not only the mechanical behaviour of the material,
but also the void nucleation and growth process. For in-
stance, Lee et al. [16] have noticed a decrease in the
depth and density of voids on the fracture surface of
austenitic stainless steel with increasing strain rate
together with a corresponding strain rate dependency
of mechanical properties. According to Miura et al.
[17], the shape and distribution of voids has been found
to be sensitive to deformation temperature and strain
rate in carbon steel. It has been reported that the void
shape assumed a more spherical shape as the tempera-
ture and strain rates increased. Salemi and Abdollah-za-
deh [18] observed that the size of the voids increased as
the temperature was increased in NiCrMoV steel. Karlik
et al. [19] reported the combined influence of deforma-
tion temperature and strain rate on the fracture mor-
phology of Fe–28Al–4Cr–0.1Ce alloy. In certain
austenitic stainless steels, formation of deformation-in-
duced martensite (DIM) is reported, and it is conceiv-
able that this could contribute to void nucleation and
the manner in which further deformation takes place.
By systematically varying the martensite volume frac-
tion, Erdogan and Tekeli [20] showed that an enhanced
strength and ductility can be achieved when more mar-
tensite is present. They explained this by proposing that
while martensite provides an effective strengthening
mechanism, its presence enhances microvoid nucleation
sites, resulting in an improved ductility. Similar observa-

1359-6462/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.scriptamat.2008.07.012
 A. Das, S. Tarafder / Scripta Materialia 59 (2008) 1014–1017
tions where martensite promotes void nucleation are
also reported by Poruks et al. [21] in a low-carbon bain-
itic steel. All the studies cited above point to the connec-
tivity between test conditions (test temperature, strain
rate), material state (microstructure, phase transforma-
tion, dislocation dynamics), mechanical properties and
the fracture surface morphology. Since deformation
and fracture are influenced and controlled, to a large ex-
tent, by the same set of factors, a fracture surface should
keep an imprint of the entire deformation process that
the material has been subject to. With the advancement
in image-processing techniques, this information on the
fracture surface can be reclaimed and used to under-
stand the mechanical behaviour of the material; this is
the objective of the present investigation.
In order to test the hypothesis that the ductile frac-
ture features can be related to mechanical properties,
it is necessary to vary systematically the density and type
of void-initiating particles contained in a microstruc-
ture. Such a scheme has been implemented in AISI
304LN stainless steel through variation of strain rates.
The detailed experimental procedure has been reported
elsewhere [22]. Beside inclusions, the shape, size and dis-
tribution of which remain unchanged for all specimens,
DIM contributed to the formation of voids. Therefore,
the variation in fracture features (i.e. void parameters)
is solely controlled by DIM. The evolution of DIM as
a function of true strain at various strain rates is sigmoi-
dal in nature [22]. At a lower strain rate, the DIM vol-
ume fraction is found to be higher than at a higher
strain rate; this is mainly attributed to the generation
of higher amounts of adiabatic heat at higher strain
rates, which suppresses martensitic transformation [23–
29].
Goods and Brown [30] have concluded that there is a
linear relationship between the measured dimple density
Figure 1. Ductile fracture surface of AISI 304LN stainless steel at strain rates of (a) 0.0001 s 1 and (c) 1.0 s 1. (b and d) Corresponding void
networks after image processing of SEM fractographs. Close correspondence between the fractograph and the void network may be noted.
1015
on the fracture surfaces and the mean inclusion spacing
for a number of aluminium alloys. In some structural
materials, e.g. high-strength steel [31,32] and aluminium
alloys [33], failure occurs due to coalescence of different
sizes of voids. Broek [34] found that void initiation
strongly depends on the size of the inclusion particle
at the nucleation sites. He has demonstrated that there
is a strong correlation between the dimple size and inclu-
sion spacing. Broek [34] and Low et al. [35] found that
the centre-to-centre spacing of the intermediate sizes of
particles correlates with the dimple spacing.
The mechanical properties of AISI 304LN stainless
steel at various strain rates have been determined
through tensile tests. Typical metrices of coalesced
microvoids on tensile fracture surfaces have been ob-
tained through extensive image processing of representa-
tive fractographs. Essentially, the image-processing
exercise involved application of a user-defined routine
in a commercial software platform which included oper-
ations of image enhancement, filtering, thresholding and
object identification. In the processed images, each of
the voids could be delineated and their dimensions mea-
sured. The measurements obtained were statistically
analyzed to provide the distribution of void sizes. The
authors have employed a similar technique for fracture
feature measurement in HSLA steel aged variously [36].
Fractographs of selected strain rates conditions
(0.0001 and 1.0 s 1) and their corresponding dimple net-
work, as processed through image-processing tech-
niques, is given in Figure 1a,b and c,d, respectively.
The dimple diameter distributions for tests at the vari-
ous strain rates are shown in Figure 2. It is observed that
the mean dimple diameter increases with the strain rate,
the minimum being at the lowest strain rate (0.0001 s 1).
Figure 3 shows that the variation in dimple density is al-
most proportional to the inverse square ( 1.88) of the
1016 A. Das, S. Tarafder / Scripta Materialia 59 (2008) 1014–1017

-1
Strain rate, s 90 75 1
1250 1.0

Average circular diameter of void, μm

0.1 70 2
0.01 85
1000 0.001 65 3

Reduction in area, %
0.0001
Frequency

Elongation, %
750 80 60 4

55 5
500
75 50 6
250
45 7
70 % EL
0
0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 2.00 2.25 40 % RA 8
Dimple size, μm Void diameter
65 35 9
Figure 2. Dimple size distribution at various strain rates. 1E-4 1E-3 0.01 0.1 1
Strain rate, s-1

Figure 5. Variation of ductility properties and average void diameter

0.28 with strain rate.
2
Void number density, number/μm

0.24
-1.88
voidden= 0.585(CD)
0.20

0.16 be pointed out that the ultimate tensile strength (UTS)

0.12
of the material appears to decrease initially with increas-
ing strain rate, contrary to expected behaviour. It is
0.08
thought that the UTS actually does not alter appreciably
0.04 at strain rates <0.001 s 1. The apparent decrease is due
0.00
to the statistical variation of test values about an almost
constant value for the limited set of experiments
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Average circular diameter of voids, μm conducted.
It appears that there is a systematic correlation of the
Figure 3. Relation between void number density and average circular mechanical properties and the dimple diameter at duc-
diameter of voids. tile fracture with the strain rate variation. Variations
of other dimple morphological parameters, such as the
void size. Theoretically such a relation is anticipated for dimple area and dimple number, with strain rate vis-à-
close-packed coverage of the entire fracture surface. vis the mechanical properties were also examined, and
This confirms that the fractographs considered in this were also found to correspond. The important point to
analysis are representative. note is that an appropriate fractographic investigation
Figure 4 shows the variation of strength properties can be used to make a reasonable estimate of the varia-
with dimple diameter; Figure 5 shows the corresponding tion in the mechanical properties and deformation
variation in ductility (note rightwards y-axis direction). behaviour of the material.
It should be noted that the dimple diameter decreases This study brings to the fore the fact that, through
with decreasing strain rate, and dimple number density fracture surface analysis, a reasonable estimate of the
increases with decreasing strain rate. This nature of var- variation in the mechanical properties of a material
iation of dimple diameter with strain rate is precisely can be made. This has been demonstrated through a sys-
similar to that of the mechanical properties. It should tematic variation of strain rates during tensile deforma-
tion in AISI 304LN stainless steel.

The authors acknowledge the support and encour-

740 500 9
YS
agement of Prof. S.P. Mehrotra, Director, NML and
Dr. R.N. Ghosh, Head of Materials Science & Technol-
Average circular diameter of void, μm

730 475 UTS 8

ogy Division. The authors express their sincere gratitude
Ultimate tensile strength, MPa

Void diameter
450 7
720 to Dr. P.C. Chakraborty, Professor, Metallurgical &
Yield strength, MPa

710
425 6 Materials Engineering Department, Jadavpur University,
Kolkata for his fruitful discussion and Dr. S. Sivaprasad,
400 5
700 Senior Scientist, of NML for his assistance with the
375 4 mechanical characterization and data analysis.
690
350 3
680
325 2 [1] A.L. Gurson, Trans.ASME, J. Eng. Mat. Tech. 99 (1977)
670 2–15.
300 1 [2] J.P. Bandstra, D.A. Koss, A. Geltmacher, P. Matic, R.K.
1E-4 1E-3 0.01 0.1 1
Strain rate, s-1 Everett, Mat. Sci. Eng. A 366 (2004) 269–281.
[3] J. Wen, Y. Huang, K.C. Hwang, C. Liu, M. Li, Int. J.
Figure 4. Variation of strength properties and average void diameter Plast. 21 (2005) 381–395.
with strain rate. [4] P.F. Thomason, Acta Mat. 33 (6) (1985) 1087–1095.
 A. Das, S. Tarafder / Scripta Materialia 59 (2008) 1014–1017
[5] J. Wilsius, A. Imad, M. Naitabdelaziz, G. Measmacque,
C. Eripret, Fat. Fract. Eng. Mat. Str. 23 (1999) 105–112.
[6] A.A. Benzerga, J. Besson, A. Pineau, Acta Mat. 52 (2004)
4623–4638.
[7] D. Chae, D.A. Koss, Mat. Sci. Eng. A 366 (2004) 299–
309.
[8] N. Ishikawa, D.M. Parks, M. Kurihara, ISI J Int. 40 (5)
(2000) 519–527.
[9] V. Jablokov, D.M. Goto, D.A. Koss, J.B. McKirgan,
Mat. Sci. Eng. A 320 (2001) 197–205.
[10] R. Becker, R.E. Smelser, O. Richmond, E.J. Appleby,
Metall. Trans. A 20 (1989) 853–861.
[11] J.P. Bandstra, D.A. Koss, Mat. Sci. Eng. A 319–321
(2001) 490–495.
[12] J.P. Bandstra, D.M. Goto, D.A. Koss, Mat. Sci. Eng. A
249 (1998) 46.
[13] J.R. Rice, D.M. Tracy, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 17 (1976)
201–217.
[14] J.R. Rice, M.A. Johnson, in: M.F. Kannien, W.F. Adler,
A.R. Rosenfield, R.I. Jaffee (Eds.), Elastic Behavior of
Solids, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1970, pp. 641–671.
[15] R.M. McMeeking, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 25 (1977) 357–
381.
[16] W.S. Lee, C.F. Lin, T.J. Liu, J. Nucl. Mat. 359 (2006)
247–257.
[17] H. Miura, T. Sakai, M. Okonogi, N. Yoshinaga, Mat.
Sci. Eng. A 483–484 (2008) 590–593.
[18] A. Salemi, A. Abdollah-zadeh, Mat. Char. 59 (2008) 484–
487.
[19] M. Karlik, P. Kratochvil, M. Janecek, J. Siegl, V.
Vodickova, Mat. Sci. Eng. A 289 (2000) 182–188.
1017
[20] M. Erdogan, S. Tekeli, Mater. Des. 23 (2002) 597–604.
[21] P. Poruks, I. Yakubtsov, J.D. Boyd, Scripta Mat. 54
(2006) 41–45.
[22] A. Das, S. Sivaprasad, M. Ghosh, P.C. Chakraborti, S.
Tarafder, Mat. Sci. Eng. A 486 (2008) 283–286.
[23] J. Talonen, P. Nenonen, G. Pape, H. Hanninen, Metall.
Trans. 36A (2005) 421–432.
[24] W.S. Lee, T.H. Chen, Scripta Mater. 54 (2006) 1463–
1468.
[25] L.E. Murr, K.P. Staudhammer, S.S. Hecker, Metall.
Trans. A 13 (1982) 627.
[26] G.B. Olson, M. Cohen, J. Less-Common Metals 28 (1972)
107.
[27] J.A. Lichtenfeld, M.C. Mataya, C.J.V. Tyne, Metall.
Trans. 37A (2006) 147.
[28] P.L. Mangonon, G. Thomas, Metall. Trans. 1 (1970)
1577.
[29] S.S. Hecker, M.G. Stout, K.P. Staudhammer, J.L. Smith,
Metall. Trans. 13A (1982) 619.
[30] S.H. Goods, L.M. Brown, Acta Mat. 27 (1979) 1–15.
[31] T.B. Cox, J.R. Low, Metall. Trans. 5 (1974) 1457–1470.
[32] G.G. Hancook, A.C. Mackenzie, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 24
(1976) 147–169.
[33] G.T. Hahn, A.R. Rosenfield, Metall. Trans. A 6A (1975)
653–668.
[34] D. Broek, Eng. Fract. Mech. 5 (1973) 55–60.
[35] J.R. Low Jr., R.H. Van Stone, R.H. Merchant, NASA
Technical Report No. 2, Research Grant NGR 38-087-
003, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1972.
[36] A. Das, S.K. Das, S. Sivaprasad, S. Tarafder, Scripta
Mat. 59 (2008) 681–683.