4.7 Article

Mixed type brittle fracture in 1.5 GPa dual-phase steel via {100} ferrite cleavage cracking

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.msea.2022.144021

关键词

Dual-phase steels; Ferrite brittle fracture; Cleavage cracking; Ferrite {100} cleavage; Crack propagation

资金

  1. New Energy and Industrial Technology Develop-ment Organization (NEDO)
  2. [JPNP14014]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present work investigates the fracture mechanisms in a dual-phase steel and reveals the dominant brittle fracture contrary to conventional wisdom. The crack initiation occurs via martensite cracking along the prior austenite grain boundaries, while the crack propagation in ferrite primarily occurs via brittle cleavage cracking. The study also clarifies the micro mechanisms associated with the sharp and blunt martensite cracks and occasional ductile ferrite fracture.
In the present work, we clarify the fracture mechanisms in a dual-phase (DP) steel consisting of-75% martensite and exhibiting tensile strength of 1.5 GPa. Generally, the DP steels are considered resistant to brittle fracture due to the crack-arresting behavior of the ferrite. However, contrary to conventional wisdom, we report a pre-dominant brittle fracture in the DP steel and clarify the associated damage mechanisms. Crack initiation occurs via martensite cracking along the prior austenite grain boundaries. The crack propagation in ferrite primarily occurs via {100} brittle cleavage cracking. Occasional void coalescence is also observed in ferrite. The brittle fracture observed in martensite is a mixed mode fracture consisting of both intergranular fracture and trans -granular cleavage cracking along {110} planes. Furthermore, it is observed that the morphology of the martensite crack (sharp and blunt crack) influences ferrite cleavage cracking. The ferrite damage mechanisms associated with the sharp and blunt crack have been elucidated. Finally, the micro mechanism for the occasional ductile ferrite fracture has been explained.

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