Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:46:14.693Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Spatially resolved texture and microstructure evolution of additively manufactured and gas gun deformed 304L stainless steel investigated by neutron diffraction and electron backscatter diffraction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 April 2018

S. Takajo ,
D. W. Brown ,
B. Clausen ,
G. T. Gray III ,
C. M. Knapp ,
D. T. Martinez ,
C. P. Trujillo  and
S. C. Vogel
S. Takajo*
Affiliation:
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545 JFE Steel Corporation, Kurashiki 712, Japan
D. W. Brown
Affiliation:
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545
B. Clausen
Affiliation:
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545
G. T. Gray III
Affiliation:
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545
C. M. Knapp
Affiliation:
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545
D. T. Martinez
Affiliation:
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545
C. P. Trujillo
Affiliation:
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545
S. C. Vogel
Affiliation:
Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545
*
a)Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. Electronic mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this study, we report the characterization of a 304L stainless steel cylindrical projectile produced by additive manufacturing. The projectile was compressively deformed using a Taylor Anvil Gas Gun, leading to a huge strain gradient along the axis of the deformed cylinder. Spatially resolved neutron diffraction measurements on the HIgh Pressure Preferred Orientation time-of-flight diffractometer (HIPPO) and Spectrometer for Materials Research at Temperature and Stress diffractometer (SMARTS) beamlines at the Los Alamos Neutron Science CEnter (LANSCE) with Rietveld and single-peak analysis were used to quantitatively evaluate the volume fractions of the α, γ, and ε phases as well as residual strain and texture. The texture of the γ phase is consistent with uniaxial compression, while the α texture can be explained by the Kurdjumov–Sachs relationship from the γ texture after deformation. This indicates that the material first deformed in the γ phase and subsequently transformed at larger strains. The ε phase was only found in volumes close to the undeformed material with a texture connected to the γ texture by the Shoji–Nishiyama orientation relationship. This allows us to conclude that the ε phase occurs as an intermediate phase at lower strain, and is superseded by the α phase when strain increases further. We found a proportionality between the root-mean-squared microstrain of the γ phase, dominated by the dislocation density, with the α volume fraction, consistent with strain-induced martensite α formation. Knowledge of the sample volume with the ε phase from the neutron diffraction analysis allowed us to identify the ε phase by electron back scatter diffraction analysis, complementing the neutron diffraction analysis with characterization on the grain level.

Keywords

electron backscatter diffractionneutron diffraction304L stainless steel
Type
Technical Article
Information
Powder Diffraction , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , June 2018 , pp. 141 - 146
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © International Centre for Diffraction Data 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Berkum, J. G. M., Deles, R., de Keijser, H. Th., and Mittemeijer, E. J. (1996). “Diffraction-line broadening due to strain fields in materials; fundamental aspects and methods of analysis,” Acta Crystallogr. A52, 730–747.Google Scholar
Bourke, M. A. M., Dunand, D. C., and Ustundag, E. (2002). “SMARTS a spectrometer for strain measurement in engineering materials,” Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 74, 1707.Google Scholar
Brown, D. W., Bernardin, J. D., Carpenter, J. S., Clausen, B., Spernjak, D., and Thopmpson, J. M. (2016). “Neutron diffraction measurements of residual stress in additively manufactured stainless steel,” Mater. Sci. Eng. A 678, 291–298.Google Scholar
Clendenen, R. L. and Drickamer, H. G. (1964). “The effect of pressure on the volume and lattice parameters of ruthenium and iron,” J. Phys. Chem. Solids 25, 865–868.Google Scholar
Frazier, W. E. (2014). “Metal additive manufacturing: a review,” Eng. Perform. 23, 1917–1928.Google Scholar
Furmanski, J., Trujillo, C. P., Martinez, D. T., Gray, G. T. III, and Brown, E. N. (2012). “Dynamic-tensile-extrusion for investigating large strain and high strain rate behavior of polymers,” Polym. Test. 31, 1031–1037.Google Scholar
Godet, S. and Jacques, P. J. (2015). “Beneficial influence of an intercritically rolled recovered ferritic matrix on the mechanical properties of TRIP-assisted multiphase steels,” Mater. Sci. Eng. A 645, 20–27.Google Scholar
Hatano, M., Kubota, Y., Shobu, T., and Mori, S. (2016). “Presence of ε-martensite as an intermediate phase during the strain-induced transformation of SUS304 stainless steel,” Philos. Mag. Lett. 96(6), 220–227.Google Scholar
Hordon, M. J. and Averbach, B. L. (1961). “X-ray measurements of dislocation density in deformed copper and aluminum single crystals,” Acta Metall. 9, 237–246.Google Scholar
Li, N., Wang, Y. D., Liu, W. J., An, Z. N., Liu, J. P., Sua, R., Li, J., and Liaw, P. K. (2014). “In situ X-ray microdiffraction study of deformation-induced phase transformation in 304 austenitic stainless steel,” Acta Mater. 64, 12–23.Google Scholar
Losko, S., Vogel, S. C., Reiche, H. M., and Nakotte, H. (2014). “A six-axis robotic sample changer for high-throughput neutron powder diffraction and texture measurements,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. 47, 2109–2112.Google Scholar
Lutterotti, L., Matthies, S., and Wenk, H.-R. (1997). “Combined texture and structure analysis of deformed limestone from time-of-flight neutron diffraction spectra,” J. Appl. Phys. 81, 594–600.Google Scholar
Maudlin, P. J., Bingert, J. F., and Gray, G. T. III (2003). “Low-symmetry plastic deformation in BCC tantalum: experimental observations, modeling and simulations,” Int. J. Plast. 19, 483–515.Google Scholar
Mertinger, V., Nagy, E., and Tranta, F. (2008). “Strain-induced martensitic transformation in textured austenitic stainless steels,” Mater. Sci. Eng. A 481–482, 718–722.Google Scholar
Murr, L. E., Staudhammer, K. P., and Hecker, S. S. (1982). “Effects of strain state and strain rate on deformation-induced transformation in 304 stainless steel: part II. Microstructural study,” Metall. Trans. A 13A, 627–635.Google Scholar
Olson, G. B. and Cohen, M. (1975). “Kinetics of strain-induced martensitic nucleation,” Metall. Trans. A 6A, 791–795.Google Scholar
Parr, J. G. (1952). “The crystallographic relationship between the phases γ and ε in the system iron-manganese,” Acta Crystallogr. 5, 842–843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rietveld, H. M. (1969). “A profile refinement method for nuclear and magnetic structures,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. 2, 65.Google Scholar
Shen, Y. F., Qiu, L. N., Sun, X., Zuo, L., Liawc, P. K., and Raabe, D. (2015). “Effects of retained austenite volume fraction, morphology, and carbon content on strength and ductility of nanostructured TRIP-assisted steels,” Mater. Sci. Eng. A 636, 551–564.Google Scholar
Smallman, R. E. and Westmacott, K. H. (1957). “Stacking faults in face-centred cubic metals and alloys,” Philos. Mag. 2, 669683.Google Scholar
Spencer, K., Embury, J. D., Conlon, K. T., Veron, M., and Brechet, Y. (2004). “Strengthening via the formation of strain-induced martensite in stainless steels,” Mater. Sci. Eng. A 387–389, 873–881.Google Scholar
Tiamiyu, A. A., Eskandari, M., Nezakat, M., Wang, X., Szpunar, J. A., and Odeshi, A. G. (2016). “A comparative study of the compressive behaviour of AISI 321 austenitic stainless steel under quasi-static and dynamic shock loading,” Mater. Des. 112, 309–319.Google Scholar
Venables, J. A. (1962). “The martensite transformation in stainless steel,” Philos. Mag. 7:73, 35–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vogel, S. C., Hartig, C., Lutterotti, L., Von Dreele, R. B., Wenk, H.-R., and Williams, D. J. (2004). “Texture measurements using the new neutron diffractometer HIPPO and their analysis using the Rietveld method,” Powder Diffr. 19, 65–68.Google Scholar
Wenk, H.-R. (1991). “Standard project for pole-figure determination by neutron diffraction,” J. Appl. Crystallogr. 24, 920–927.Google Scholar
Wenk, H.-R., Lutterotti, L., and Vogel, S. (2003). “Texture analysis with the new HIPPO TOF diffractometer,” Nucl. Instrum. Methods Phys. Res. A 515, 575–588.Google Scholar
Wenk, H.-R., Lutterotti, L., and Vogel, S. C. (2010). “Rietveld texture analysis from TOF neutron diffraction data,” Powder Diffr. 25, 283–296.Google Scholar
Williamson, G. K. and Smallman, R. E. (1956). “III. Dislocation densities in some annealed and cold-worked metals from measurements on the X-ray Debye-Scherrer spectrum,” Philos. Mag. 1(1), 3.Google Scholar