4.6 Article

On the Competitive Substitutional Partitioning During Nano-pearlitic Transformation in Multicomponent Steels

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11661-022-06635-z

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. CSIR-NML [i-PSG-0303, MLP 3123]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Bulk nano-pearlitic microstructure with interlamellar spacing below 100 nm was achieved by rapidly undercooling a hypereutectoid multicomponent steel. The partitioning kinetics of substitutional components between ferrite and cementite were analyzed through experiments and simulations, showing that manganese had the fastest kinetics in the early stages, followed by chromium, while manganese and silicon had much faster rates compared to chromium in the completion stages of partitioning.
Bulk nano-pearlitic microstructure with apparent interlamellar spacing below 100 nm has been attained by rapidly undercooling a hypereutectoid multicomponent steel below equilibrium eutectoid temperature from the austenitization temperature. The aforementioned processing rendered non-partitioned pearlite growth in the steel, as confirmed by acquiring compositional variation across the austenite/pearlite growth front using scanning transmission electron microscopy coupled with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (STEM-EDS) technique. The post transformation sidewise partitioning of substitutional components between ferrite and cementite has been critically assessed by interrupting the cooling process at various intervals followed by STEM-EDS and atom probe tomography (APT) across the austenite/pearlite and ferrite/cementite interfaces. This partitioning phenomena has been simulated using DICTRA(R) and validated with experimental observations. It is inferred that partitioning kinetics of Mn is fastest in the early stages followed by Cr in the intermediate. However, towards the completion stages of partitioning, Mn and Si have much faster rate as compared to Cr.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available