4.7 Article

Void coalescence and fracture behavior of notched and un-notched tensile tested specimens in fine grain dual phase steel

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.msea.2015.07.036

关键词

Dual Phase Steel; Void coalescence; Fracture surface analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Due to growing global concern about the environmental issues, steel developers have been forced by automobile makers to produce more efficient steel grades with high strength to weight ratios along with high crashworthiness performance. In order to find deficiencies of the existing steels and develop superior steel products, detailed understanding of deformation and damage behavior in the existing steels is needed. In the present research, deformation and damage evolution during room temperature uniaxial tensile test of a modern high strength Dual Phase Steel, i.e. DP780, were studied. Detailed scanning electron microscopy (SEM) examination of the microstructures of notched and un-notched tensile fractured specimens revealed that in notched specimen, plastic deformation was concentrated more within the notched region. Therefore, much higher reduction in thickness with a high reduction gradient occurred in this region, In the un-notched specimen, however, plastic deformation was more uniformly distributed in larger parts of the gauge length, and therefore, thickness reduction happened with a lower gradient. Although geometric notch on the specimen did not change the void nucleation and growth mechanisms, the kinetics of these phenomena was influenced. On the other hand, voids linkage mechanism tended to change from void coalescence in the un-notched specimen to void sheeting in the notched specimen. Moreover, three different models developed by Brown & Embury (BM), Thomason and Pardoen were employed to predict the final fracture strain. It was revealed that, BM model showed much more accurate predictions for the studied DP steel in comparison with those of Thomason and Pardoens' models. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据