You are on page 1of 6

# MSE/AOE3094 Test #2 Solutions

## March 13, 2011

The second test in my MSE/AOE3094 course consisted of four questions, 25 pts each, with different materials used in four different versions of the test. Please consult your own test paper for specific information on the material being considered on your version of the test, and other given information.. Complete solutions are shown below, following each section. Boldfaced sections approximate the solution required for full credit on the test. 1) A component made of a common steel alloy is to be case hardened by carburizing to increase strength. Given data is shown on your test paper. (a) What temperatures would be needed to achieve a total case depth in this sample of 1 mm after (i) one hour of processing and (ii) ten hours of processing? Total case depth is defined as the point at which C* = (Cx-C0)/(Cs-C0) = 0.05. We can factor this into the equation for non-steady state diffusion to obtain: (Cx-C0)/(Cs-C0) = 0.05 = 1 erf[x/2Dt] In this formula, both Cs and D are explicit functions of temperature, but the concentration ratio cannot be used to solve for T, since Cx is unknown and will also vary with Cs. We can use the right-hand side of the equation to determine D, and thus T, as follows: 0.95 = erf[x/2Dt] By interpolation (Table 6.1): x/2Dt = 1.375 x = 2.75Dt D = t-1(x/2.75)2 = t-1(0.001/2.75)2 = 1.322x10-7(t-1) For 1 hr: D = 1.322x10-7(3600-1) = 3.67x10-11 m2/sec For 10 hr: D = 1.322x10-7(36,000-1) = 3.67x10-12 m2/sec For diffusion of carbon in -Fe (Table 6.2), D0 = 2.3x10-5 m2/s and QD=148,000 J/mol. Thus, we can plug into the Arrhenius Eqn for diffusion (Eqn 6.8) to obtain: For 1 hr: T=1334 K = 1061C For 10 hr: T=1137 K = 864C

(b) What would be the effective case depth of a sample processed at the higher of these two temperatures when total case depth of 1 mm has been achieved? Would it be the same at the lower temperature? To find effective case depth at 1061C, we can again use Eqns 6.5 and 6.8, along with the definition of effective case depth (ECD= depth for which Cx=0.4). However, the values you obtain will be dependent on the material involved, as shown in the Table below: Material (all Steels) 1020 2515 3115 4820 CS at 1061C (% C) 1.6375 1.4275 1.5675 1.4975 C0 (% C) 0.20 0.15 0.15 0.20 Erf(z) 0.861 0.804 0.955 .846 z=x/2Dt 1.046 0.915 0.955 1.008 ECD (x, mm) 0.761 mm 0.665 mm 0.694 mm 0.733 mm

Since surface solubility varies with T, so must the effective case depth. Specifically, the ECD should decrease with temperature for samples with equivalent TCD (which you were not required to show). (c) Case hardening is a special case of alloy strengthening. How might we further enhance the strength of this material using other processes? Should these other processes be performed before or after the carburization described above (or is this irrelevant)? Briefly explain why. Besides case hardening (which in this case involves interstitial alloying of carbon with iron) we could also strengthen samples by substitutional alloying, by grain size reduction, or by cold working. Substitutional alloying, in fact, is what creates the differences between 1020 steel (containing only carbon and iron) and the other three steels discussed in this question. Substitutional alloying should be done prior to any forming or carburizing, since metal mixing rates are significant only at very high T (usually T>Tmelt). Grain size reduction and cold working should be done after carburizing, since carburizing temperatures are high enough to recrystallize the steel and negate these effects. Grain size can be kept low by minimizing carburizing time and quickly cooling afterward, while surface cold working can be accomplished by methods such as shot peening.

2) Consider a support strut to be used in a vehicle application where temperature variations over the entire range of extremes found on Earths surface are expected. The following information is known: Temperature extremes will run from TMIN = 70C to TMAX = 60C. The total gap the strut is bridging will remain at a constant value of 400 mm, independent of temperature. Thus, the length of the strut cannot exceed 400 mm. There can be elastic deformation at high temperature, but no plastic deformation. We want the condition at TMAX to produce the maximum possible elastic compression. The strut is constructed from a material with known given properties (tabulated in solutions). It must be cylindrical, with diameter=20 mm under stress at TMAX. a) At the high temperature end of the range, how much compressive axial strain is allowed without yielding, and how much corresponding radial expansion will have occurred because of Poissons ratio effects? SOLUTION:
At the high temperature maximum, the rod will be under compression due to thermal effects. Setting this compressive strain equal to the yield strain (defined as yield strength over modulus) gives the following results for the four given options: Material Yield Strength Modulus Yield Strain Poisson ratio Radial strain 7075 Al 490 MPa 70 GPa -0.0070 0.33 +0.0023 4340 Steel 860 210 -0.0041 0.30 +0.0012 Brass 360 150 -0.0024 0.34 +0.0008 304 Stainless 1120 195 -0.0057 0.30 +0.0017

b) When we cool the sample down from TMAX, the compressive strain from part (a) will reduce and the diameter will decrease because of both thermal contraction (see Eqn 9.19) and negation of Poisson effects that existed. At what temperature will the sample exhibit both (i) length of exactly 400 mm and (ii) zero external stress? At this temperature, what will the diameter of the strut be? SOLUTION:
We must allow enough thermal contraction to remove all of the thermal strain from above at some lower T, at which point the radial Poisson strain from (a) will also be removed. In addition, the material will have experienced thermal contraction in radius equal to that in the axial direction. The diameter will thus be reduced from 20 mm at T(max) to a smaller value. Note that in some cases this may require impossible (negative T) conditions, & that the stated minimum temperature in the problem is independent of the T needed to bring about this physical condition. Material Radial Coeff of Final T Thermal Final Poisson strain T Expansion needed contraction diameter 7075 Al +0.0023 23.2x10^-6 -242C -0.0070 19.81 mm 4340 Steel +0.0012 11.9x10^-6 -285C (<0 K) -0.0041 19.89 Brass +0.0008 16.2x10^-6 -88C -0.0024 19.94 304 Stainless +0.0017 14.1x10^-6 -344C (<0 K) -0.0057 19.85

c) During use, surface cracks as deep as 1.0 mm could be introduced by damage to the rod, and it could experience shocks equivalent to 400 MPa stress. Given a fracture toughness constant, Y=1.1, would the rod be subject to (a) brittle fracture, (b) ductile fracture, (c) yielding, or (d) no failure? Assume room temperature (25C) behavior, but comment on how this might change if we heat or cool the sample to the max and min extremes given. SOLUTION:
Using the given room temperature properties, we can find the critical stress for each of the cases, using the factor Y, the fracture toughness, and the crack length. This allows determination of the final condition at room temperature. At higher T, toughness would be expected to increase, giving proportionately higher critical stress but lower yield strength, and at lower T, toughness and critical stress decreases, and yield strength increases. Material Fracture Critical Condition Condition Condition toughness stress under stress at Higher T at Lower T 7075 Al 24 MPam 389 MPa Brittle fracture Might yield. Same. 4340 Steel 50 811 Safe Likely same Might fracture Brass 32 519 Yielded Likely same Might fracture 304 Stainless 77 1249 Safe Likely same Likely same.

3) A rectangular bar with initial dimensions of 250 mm length, 20 mm width, and 5 mm thickness is to be processed by a series of cold working and recrystallization steps. See your own paper for given data. The following series of steps occurs. After each step is completed, what is the yield strength of the bar, what is its ductility, what is its length, and is the sample still intact or not? This question involves alternate cold working and annealing processes, which will have different effects for each of the three materials involved (1040 steel, copper, and brass). While the steps in the process are the same in each case, the results will be different. Length can be determined from the given constant volume condition (A1l1 = A2l2). Strength and ductility are read directly from Fig 8.19, and determination of fracture is also based on the behavior shown in Fig 8.19 (the maximum %CW shown is the fracture point: 51% for 1040 steel, 67% for brass and copper). a) The unworked initial sample is passed through the 16x4.5 mm die, heated to 300C until a stable state is achieved, cooled back to room T, then passed through the 15x4 mm die. 1040 steel: Heating to 300C is insufficient to recrystallize the sample, so the CW is cumulative. %CW[total]=(100 mm2 60 mm2)/100 mm2 x100% = 40%. Brass: Heating to 300C is insufficient to recrystallize the sample, so the CW is cumulative. %CW[total]=(100 mm2 60 mm2)/100 mm2 x100% = 40%. Copper: Heating to 300C is well above T[recryst]. First working step induces %CW% = (100 mm2 72 mm2)/100 mm2 x100% = 28%. This is negated when heating occurs. The second CW step gives %CW = (72-60)/72 x100% = 16.7%.

## Intact? Yes Yes Yes

b) After the processes in (a), the sample is heated to 500C until a stable state is achieved, cooled back to RT, passed through the 12x3 mm die, then heated to 500C again until stable, and cooled to RT. 500C heating temperatures in this part are sufficient to recrystallize all samples, but 300C will again not recrystallize brass. The new CW step introduces %CW = (60 mm2 36 mm2)/60 mm2 x100% = 40%. This will be negated by the final heating step, so final properties are for 0%CW, except for the 300 treated brass which will continue to accumulate work here to a level of 64%CW. Material Steel Brass (500C) Brass (300C) Copper Length (mm) 694.4 694.4 694.4 694.4 Yield Strength (MPa) 450 180 430 155 Ductility (%EL) 26% 67% 3% 44% Intact? Yes Yes Yes Yes

c) Finally, after (b), the sample is passed through the 10x2.5 mm die, heated to 100C until stable, then cooled back to RT. 100C heating will not recrystallize any of the samples, so the final %CW step remains at the end, with %CW = (36 mm2 25 mm2)/36 mm2 x100% = 31%. For the brass still worked at the end of (b), this gives instead 75% CW and breaks the sample at about 67% CW (at which point length would be about 760 mm). Material Steel Brass [0% work >(b)] Brass[preworked] Copper Length (mm) 1000.0 1000.0 <1000.0 1000.0 Yield Strength (MPa) 760 390 430 280 Ductility (%EL) 10% 12.5% 3% 8.5% Intact? Yes Yes No Yes

4) Refer to your test paper for given stress-strain data. a) What is the resilience of this material? b) What is the Brinell hardness of this material? c) What is the average grain size of this material? d) What is the true stress on this material at failure? e) What is the relaxation modulus of this material? f) Assuming that this is a fatigue limiting material, estimate the fatigue limit. g) Describe three ways that deformation at the atomic level would necessarily differ between FCC and BCC structure.
Resilience is measured by the area under the elastic portion of the stress-strain curve, which can be approximated as (1/2) Y Y. For the brass shown in Fig 7.12, U R (1/2)(250 MPa)(0.0045) = 3 3 562.5 kJ/m . For the steel shown in Fig 7.33, UR (1/2)(1600 MPa)(0.009) = 7200 kJ/m . Brinell hardness correlates with tensile strength. The tensile strength of the brass in Fig 7.12 is 450 MPa, while the steel in Fig 7.33 has tensile strength of 1850 MPa. Using Fig 7.31 (or, for steel, Eqn 7.25a), we can find the Brinell hardness of these materials: HB[brass] 140 and HB[steel] 535. Average grain size cannot be determined directly from a stress-strain curve. Each stressstrain curve will only apply for a particular grain size, but this size is rarely specified. If Fig 8.15 applies for the brass in Fig 7.12 (which is not guaranteed, but is a reasonable approach here), then we could extrapolate the behavior in Fig 8.15 to give an approximate average grain diameter of 0.003 mm. The grain size for the steel sample is impossible to determine, as no corresponding Hall-Petch figure is given for steel. True stress is related to engineering stress and strain, as shown in Eqn 7.18a. This equation applies strictly only for strain values before the onset of necking, but it can be used to provide an estimate here in the absence of other information. Given the behavior shown in the given figures for properties at failure, we obtain these estimates as: T(brass) = (375 MPa)(1+0.36) = 510 MPa T(steel) = (1775 MPa)(1+0.077) = 1910 MPa Relaxation modulus is defined as the time-dependent stiffness of a material under conditions of constant strain. Since metals do not typically exhibit changes in stress state over time at RT, the relaxation modulus really has no meaning in this case, although it could be technically defined as equal to the elastic modulus for all values of t. In this case, the elastic modulus of the brass is approximately 80 GPa. The elastic modulus of the steel is 200 GPa. Fatigue limit can be estimated as 30-65% of the tensile strength (135-290 MPa for brass, 5551200 MPa for steel). The more conservative estimate is better in either case, as it is a safer choice. If you said that the brass limit cannot be estimated from given rules, this is acceptable. Atomic level permanent deformation in BCC and FCC materials will be necessarily distinct because of (1) different slip planes, (2) different slip directions, and (3) different twinning conditions.