4.7 Article

Effects of Ti alloying on resistance to hydrogen embrittlement in (Nb plus Mo)-alloyed ultra-high-strength hot-stamping steels

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.msea.2020.139763

关键词

Hot-stamping steel; 32MnB5 steel; Resistance to hydrogen embrittlement; Grain refinement; Complex carbide

资金

  1. CBMM
  2. POSCO Technical Research Laboratories
  3. Korea University
  4. Brain Korea 21 PLUS Project for Center for Creative Industrial Materials

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A boron-containing 1.8-2.0-GPa-grade hot-stamping steel, which has been attracting great attentions as reinforcing automotive parts, often leads to the deteriorated resistance to hydrogen embrittlement due to its high strength level. The micro-alloying elements such as Nb and Mo have been known to improve the resistance to hydrogen embrittlement by refining grains and providing interfaces of precipitates. Ti is also utilized for the mentioned purposes; however, the effect of Ti on hydrogen embrittlement, particularly in (Nb + Mo) multi-alloyed system, has not been revealed clearly yet. In this study, therefore, the alloying effects of Ti on resistance to hydrogen embrittlement were investigated via controlling Ti content and conducting slow-strain-rate tensile (SSRT) tests and thermal desorption analyses (TDA) after the hydrogen charging. The complex addition of Nb, Mo, and Ti promotes the formation of nanoscale (Nb,Ti)C and (Nb,Mo,Ti)C complex precipitates along with coarse Ti(C,N) particles. The increased Ti content to 0.03 wt% increases the volume fraction of nanoscale precipitates, which effectively refines the prior austenite grain size and interfacial incoherency, thereby providing stable hydrogen trapping sites with the higher activation energy for hydrogen desorption. Although the increased Ti also promotes the formation of brittle coarse Ti(C,N) particles, this negative effect of the particles can be minimized or prevented by the decrease in particle size due to the interaction with Nb and Mo.

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