4.7 Article

Effect of welding on microstructure and mechanical response of X100Q bainitic steel through nanoindentation, tensile, cyclic plasticity and fatigue characterisation

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.msea.2020.140728

关键词

Fatigue; Strength; Hardness; Welding; Microstructure; Heat affected zone

资金

  1. NUI Galway [SFI/14/IA/2604]
  2. University of Limerick [SFI/14/IA/2604]
  3. I-Form Advanced Manufacturing Research Centre [SFI/16/RC/3872]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents an experimental characterization of fatigue at welded connections for the next-generation high-strength low-alloy offshore riser steel, X100Q, showing superior fatigue performance compared to X80 steel. Significant differences are demonstrated between parent material and simulated heat affected zone (HAZ) materials.
This paper presents an experimental characterisation of fatigue at welded connections for the next-generation high-strength low-alloy offshore riser steel, X100Q. An instrumented girth weld is conducted with a parallel programme of physical-thermal simulation (Gleeble) to develop heat affected zone (HAZ) test specimens. X100Q is shown to exhibit superior fatigue performance to the current state of the art offshore riser steel, X80. Significant differences are demonstrated between the parent material and simulated HAZ in terms of hardness, monotonic strength and cyclic plasticity response, which can be related to the observed microstructural transformations: the refined grain and bainitic block size in the fine-grained HAZ are shown to give a harder and stronger response than parent material, whereas the coarsened bainitic lath structure in the intercritical HAZ gives a softer and weaker response. The simulated HAZ materials exhibit superior fatigue performance to the parent material and weld metal. A significant reduction in life is shown for cross-weld specimens, indicating susceptibility to failure due to HAZ softening for matched or over-matched X100Q welds.

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