Journal of Wuhan University of Technology-Mater. Sci. Ed. Feb.

2014
131
Signicance of Experimental Data in the Design
of Structures Made from 1.4057 Steel
Brnic J
1
, Turkalj G
1
, NIU Jitai
2,3
, Canadija M
1
, Lanc D
1
(1.Department of Engineering Mechanics, Faculty of Engineering, University of Rijeka, Vukovarska 58, 51000 Rijeka, Croatia2.School of
Materials Science and Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150001, China; 3.School of Materials Science and Engineering,
Henan Polytechnic University, Jiaozuo 454160, China)
Abstract: This paper presents experimentally-obtained data which can be of importance in the design
procedure of engineering components made of 1.4057 (X17CrNi16-2; AISI 431) steel. In this manner, uniaxialy
tests related to determine material mechanical properties and short-time creep behavior were performed. Based
on the mentioned tests, ultimate tensile strength, 0.2 offset yield strength and modulus of elasticity at low
and elevated temperatures were determined. Also, creep behavior of considered steel was tested for selected
temperatures and selected stress levels. According to experimentally determined Charpy impact energy an
assessment of fracture toughness was made.
Key words: material properties; short-time creep; fracture toughness calculation; 1.4057 steel
Wuhan University of Technology and SpringerVerlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014
(Received: Feb. 19, 2013; Accepted: Dec. 23, 2013)
Brnic J: Prof.; Ph D; E-mail: brnic@riteh.hr
DOI 10.1007/s11595-014-0880-0
1 Introduction
Failure in structures is a well-known technical
problem. Different mechanical failure modes can
be observed in all fields of engineering and may
be numbered as: force or temperature induced
deformation, yielding, fatigue, corrosion, wear, impact,
creep, etc. Certain failure modes (corrosion, fatigue) are
single phenomena, whereas others (corrosion-fatigue)
are combined phenomena. The material properties of
steel are linked to chemical composition, processing
path, etc. The designer has to know which properties
are required for a structure under consideration
[1]
. It is
well known that a certain structure is intended to serve
a defined aim at prescribed environmental conditions
which may vary from low temperature conditions to
elevated temperatures. At room temperature and in
the absence of adverse effects, a properly designed
structure will support its static design load for an
unlimited time
[2]
. A sustained load of a certain level at
elevated temperatures may produce inelastic strain in
the material that increases with time. This phenomenon
is known as creep
[3]
. An established denition of creep
is that this is time-dependent behavior during which
deformation continues to increase while the stress (load)
is kept constant
[4]
. For small strains, the constant load
and constant stress creep processes are the same
[5]
.
Creep is appreciable at temperatures above 0.4 T
m
,
where T
m
is the melting temperature. According to a
typical representation of creep phenomenon in metals,
well-known from literature, three different stages can
be recognized and these are: primary, secondary and
tertiary creep. Temperature and time dependence of
a creep deformation process indicate that creep is a
thermally activated process. Dislocation climb, vacancy
diffusion and grain boundary sliding are usually
numbered as mechanisms of creep
[6]
. The laboratory
creep procedure is conducted at constant stress (load)
and temperature, but components of machines in
service hardly ever operate under constant conditions
[7]
.
Also, low temperature service conditions represent an
important challenge for steel today, especially steel
plates. Low design temperatures require steel exhibiting
sound fracture toughness behavior combined with high
strength. Although much research has been carried out
with different kinds of steel in question, they do not
have the same characteristics. Some of the researches
mentioned and published are listed in the following
part of this paper. Some relative effects of various
temperatures on the microstructure and mechanical
properties of electron beam welds of X17CrNi16-2
132
Vol.29 No.1 Brnic J et al: Signicance of Experimental Data in the Design of Structures...
martensitic stainless steel were studied
[8]
. The results
of nitrogen plasma immersion ion implantation into
differently preheated steel (martensite and ferrite
structure of different steel, including X17CrNi16-2 ,
X20Cr13) are reported
[9]
. An interesting study based
on wear behavior of martensitic stainless steel was
carried out in Ref.[10]. As found in this investigation,
some martensitic stainless steel samples such as
X17CrNi16-2, X20Cr13 and others, were injected with
nitrogen using plasma immersion ion implantation at
different temperatures between 320 and 380 and at
different pulse voltages. The formation of an expanded
martensite layer was found after implantation for all
samples with surface hardness up to 10.000 MPa.
Wear was measured in a dry ball-on-disc conguration.
Specific wear was reduced by factors of 2-10 to the
same absolute level. Through an increase in the contact
pressure, an increased wear rate was found, while on
the other hand no inuence of velocity was observed.
A study of difference in both corrosion and abrasion
resistances between amorphous-nanocrystalline
composite structured Ni-P deposits and microcrystalline
structured Ni-P deposits is presented
[11]
, where
electroplating parameters affecting phosphorus
content in Ni-P deposits (temperature, current density,
pH, H
3
PO
3
concentration and agitation rate) were
analyzed in order to obtain amorphous-nanocrystalline
composite structured Ni-P deposits on X17CrNi16-2
stainless steel. In Ref.[12], the slurry erosion of two
coatings applied by oxy fuel powders and wire arc
spraying processes onto sand-blasted AISI 304 steel
was studied and the results were compared with those
obtained with X17CrNi16-2 and ASTM A743 stainless
steel, which are commonly used for hydraulic turbines
and accessories. Sometimes it is interesting to make
a comparison between the mechanical properties of
the steel in question (X17CrNi16-2) and other kinds
of steel, e g, high-strength low-alloy steel (HSLA),
structural steel or steel which is commonly used in
the can-making industry but also consider material
behavior under similar environmental conditions.
Some details relating to this matter can be found in
Refs.[13- 17].
2 Material under consideration
and experimental equipment
Material under consideration was 1.4057 steel
(DIN/EN: X17CrNi16-2; AISI 431) with the following
composition in mass (%): C (0.156), Si (0.496), Mn
(0.6749), Cr (15.9), Ni (1.42), Mo (0.234), Cu (0.0160),
S (0.0228), P (0.0403), V (0.03859), Rest (81.0).
Because this is high yield strength steel, it is not
readily cold worked; therefore it is not recommended
for those operations. Under an annealed condition, this
grade is relatively easily machined, but if hardened
to above 30HRC machining becomes more difficult.
This steel has the best corrosion resistance arnong all
martensitic steel although it is lower than the common
austenitic grades. It can be widely used in industry,
especially in the aircraft industry. Typical applications
include: nuts and bolts, pump shafts, propeller shafting,
machine building industry, paper industry, aircraft
fastener fittings, chemical process equipment, gears,
etc.
The basic testing equipment for experimental
investigations was the materials testing machine. For
testing at low temperatures, a temperature chamber was
used, while at elevated temperature a high temperature
furnace and a high temperature extensometer were
employed. Notch impact energy was determined by a
Charpy impact pendulum machine.
The test specimens were taken from AISI 431
(X17CrNi16-2) steel rods and prepared according to
the appropriate standard. Uniaxial tensile tests were
performed according to ASTM: E8M-11 standard at
room temperature and ASTM: E21-09 standard at
elevated temperature, while those at low temperatures
according to ISO 15579:2000(E) standard
[18]
. Testing
procedures with reference to material creep behavior
were carried out according to the ASTM: E139-11
standard. All of the ASTM standards mentioned are
given in Ref.[19].
3 Results and discussion
3. 1 Mechani cal properti es at l ow and
elevated temperatures
Engineering diagrams (stress-strain behavior)
of 1.4057 (AISI 431; X17CrNi16-2) steel at low
temperatures are presented in Fig.1, while engineering
diagrams at elevated temperatures are presented in
Fig.2.
The effect of low and elevated temperatures
on mechanical properties for 1.4057 (AISI 431;
X17CrNi16-2) steel is presented in Fig.3.
The effect of elevated temperatures on specimens
elongation (
t
) and reduction in area ( ) for 1.4057
(AISI 431; X17CrNi16-2) steel is exhibited in Fig.4.
Journal of Wuhan University of Technology-Mater. Sci. Ed. Feb.2014
133
3.2 Uniaxial short-time creep tests
Short-time creep tests were performed under
selected environmental conditions.
The appropriate creep responses are shown in
Figs.5-7.
3.3 Engineering calculation of fracture
toughness based on Charpy V- notch
impact energy
A number of tests for determining different
material properties are performed. Based on the main
purpose of structure during its service life, some
selected properties such as ultimate tensile strength,
hardness, modulus of elasticity, fracture toughness
or any other, may be of crucial interests. However,
two key mechanical properties are fracture toughness
and yield strength. Fracture toughness (K
Ic
), called
plane strain fracture toughness is used to design
134
Vol.29 No.1 Brnic J et al: Signicance of Experimental Data in the Design of Structures...
structure against fracture while yield strength (
0.2
) is
used to design structure against plastic deformation.
Fracture mechanics, as a discipline underlying design
against fracture, may be treated as a subject concerned
with predicting the failure of a structural component
containing crack-like defects
[20]
. Stress intensity factor
(marked as SIF or K) is a parameter that describes
stress distribution around the crack tip. Critical value
of the SIF , designed as a minimum value of fracture
toughness (K
Ic
) has been introduced to define the
nominal stress at which fracture takes place. A fracture
toughness test can be used to measure the resistance
of a material to crack extension
[21]
. However, this test
may yield either a single value of fracture toughness or
a resistance curve. Also, other fracture parameters may
be considered. Fracture toughness standards prescribe
procedures for obtaining (testing) certain fracture
parameter or appropriate resistance curve
[21,22]
. Usually
several specimen configurations are permitted under
ASTM standard E 399 for K
Ic
testing and these are,
for example: the compact, SENB (single edge notched
bend), arc-shaped, and disc-shaped specimens. The
force value computed from the equation given in the
standard mentioned is a valid K
Ic
result only if all given
validity requirements of the standard are met. The
J-integral is usually used in a rate-independent quasi-
static fracture analysis and can be related to the SIF
if the material response is linear. Fracture toughness
(K
Ic
) is the most useful material property in the design
against fracture, but there are also other tests that
provide a fracture resistance measurement. Namely,
measurements of K
Ic
involve the use of large specimens
which are difficult to excise from an operating
structural component. An impact test widely used in
ferrous metals and the plastics industry is one such test
performed by the Charpy pendulum impact machine.
On the other hand, notch acuity as well as temperatures
used in the test do not have to be representative for
conditions in which different types of steel are used.
This means that the results of Charpy impact tests
cannot be used directly to predict in-service behavior
and failure characteristics, because the fracture mode
depends not only on the properties of steel, but also on
the parameters stated. Although the Charpy test is easy
to perform and is a very useful test for assessing the
quality of a product, it may be misleading to directly
apply the results to real industrial applications. Namely,
the energy of fracture depends on sample geometry,
and many structures do not contain notches of the type
used in Charpy tests. However, to avoid complication
in the standard test of fracture toughness measurement,
some relationships between fracture toughness (K
Ic
) and
Charpy notch impact toughness (CVN) were proposed.
One of them is presented and explained in
[14]
:
(1)
Through this equation, it is possible to determine
the average value of K
Ic
. The form of this equation is
very similar to that in Ref.[22]. Use of Eq.(1) may have
the advantage of assessing fracture toughness because
parameters (E, CVN and ) at selected temperature can
be experimentally determined.
Eq.(2) includes: K
Ic
(MPa ) - fracture toughness,
E (MPa) - modulus of elasticity, (J/mm
2
) - impact
toughness, and -Poissons ratio. Factor f is a factor
whose value can be adopted, for example, according
to the region of notch impact energy value. In
general, fracture toughness is usually considered at
room temperature. The impact toughness ( ) can be
calculated as:
= K(U)/A or = K(V)/A = CVN/A (2)
In Eq.(2), U or V is a symbol for the type of notch
used. The type of specimen notch depends largely on
the characteristics of the material employed. In the
present case, a 2 V notch was used.
Charpy V-notch impact energy (CVN) is expressed
in (J), and it is experimentally obtained, while A (mm
2
)
is a cross-sectional area of the Charpy impact specimen
at the place of notch. For the Poisson ratio of this
material, a value of = 0.3 was adopted and the cross-
sectional area of the specimen was A= 80 mm
2
. At
temperature of 20 the following average values for
CVN and E were experimentally obtained:
K (V) = CVN = 55 J, E= 205 000 MPa
If an average value of f = 15 is adopted, according
to Eq.(1) and Eq.(2), the following values were
calculated:
According to correlation between CVN and K
Ic
,
given in Refs.[23,24], for an applicable region of CVN
= (7- 68) J, the following formula is given:
K
Ic
= 14.6 (CVN)1/2 (3)
Journal of Wuhan University of Technology-Mater. Sci. Ed. Feb.2014
135
Using Eq.(4), the following value for fracture
toughness is calculated:
Also, according to equation
[24, 25]
:
K
Ic
= 8.47 (CVN)
0.63
(4)
which is assumed to be applicable to test data at
all temperatures; the following value is calculated:
Sound consistency between the obtained values
using Formulas (2), (4) and (5) can be observed.
Comparing Eq.(2) and Eq.(5), factor f can be
expressed as follows:
(5)
If factor f is calculated using Eq. (5) with
experimentally obtained CVN values at different
temperatures, fracture toughness can be calculated.
However, using Eq.(5), in Table 1, data related to
fracture toughness are displayed. The corresponding
curves of CVN energy and fracture toughness versus
temperature are displayed in Fig.8.
In the literature, experimentally obtained data
pertaining to the fracture toughness of the material
under consideration (AISI 431) can not be found . The
fracture toughness of AISI 431 steel, which is derived
from the calculation based on the experimentally
determined Charpy impact energy in this research, is
105.8 MPa . This data can be compared with the data
related to the fracture toughness that can be found in
Ref. [26]. Namely, in the literature
[26]
it is specified
as the value of the experimentally obtained fracture
toughness for steel AISI 430, i e, for the steel of AISI
400 series. This steel contains slightly less carbon than
steel AISI 431. In Ref.[26], for the fracture toughness
at room temperature the value of 88 MPa is given.
Taking into account that aforementioned steels (AISI
431 and AISI 430) are not completely the same,
although they belong to the AISI 400 series, it can be
said that calculated value for fracture toughness of
AISI 431 steel, based on Charpy impact energy, can be
considered quite reliable, because fracture toughness of
both steels does not differ so much.
3.4 Discussion
According to stress versus temperature behavior
in Fig. 3, it can be observed that up to a temperature of
250 both ultimate tensile strength and 0.2 percent
offset yield strength fall slightly with an increase of
temperature. Also, in a temperature range between
300 and 550 these properties/strengths decrease
quite rapidly. Elongations of steel at elevated
temperatures during the first period of an increase of
temperature, e g, up to 300 , do not exhibit abrupt
change, while subsequently elongations increase
rapidly. Observing mechanical properties at low
temperatures, it can be seen that ultimate tensile
strength rises slightly while the temperature decreases.
At the same time, during a fall in temperature down
to (-50) , 0.2 percent offset yield strength slightly
rises and then decreases. This steel can withstand
high temperature exposure quite well if stress levels
are low enough. For example, at a temperature of 400
if the stress level does not exceed approximately
136
Vol.29 No.1 Brnic J et al: Signicance of Experimental Data in the Design of Structures...
25% of 0.2 percent offset yield strength, creep strains
in the short-time creep condition may be acceptable.
Practically, the same can be said for a temperature of
500 . Also, if the temperature increases up to 600
and the stress level is kept quite low, e g, below 15% of
0.2 percent offset yield strength, creep strains are not
high. In addition, Charpy V-notch impact energy was
measured and notch impact toughness was calculated.
According to the CVN data, using the proposed
formulas, average values of fracture toughness were
also calculated.
4 Conclusions
For e ngi ne e r i ng pr a c t i c e , i nt e r e s t i ng
experimentally-obtained data regarding the behavior
of AISI 431 (X17CrNi16-2) steel under different
environmental conditions is presented. In these
experimental investigations, the ultimate tensile
strength and 0.2 percent offset yield strength at low
and elevated temperatures were determined. Obtained
results are presented in the form of engineering
stress-strain diagrams. Temperature dependence of
mechanical properties is also shown. Short-time creep
behavior was considered and creep responses are
displayed in the form of creep curves. As it can be
seen tensile strength and 0.2 offset yield strength are of
high levels at room temperature but with temperature
increase they decrease rapidly. Regarding short-time
creep behavior it can be said that this steel can not
be treated as enough creep resistant in applications
and service conditions where high temperature in
combination with high level of stress arise, should be
avoided. Finally, an assessment of fracture toughness
using well known formula based on Charpy impact
energy is made for certain temperature levels.
References
[1] Bramtt B L. Effects of Composition, Processing, and Structures on
Properties of Irons and Steels, In: S. R. Lampman (Ed.), Materials
Selection and Design[M]. OH: ASM International, 1997
[2] Boresi A P, Schmidt R J. Advanced Mechanics of Materials[M]. sixth ed.
New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2003
[3] Collins A. Failure of Materials in Mechanical Design[M]. Second ed.
New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1993
[4] Solecki R, Conant P R. Advanced Mechanics of Materials[M]. New
York: Oxford University Press, 2003
[5] Findley W N, Lai J, Onaran S K. Creep and Relaxation of Nonlinear
Viscoelastic Materials[M]. New York: Dover Publication, 1989
[6] Raghavan V. Materials Science and Engineering[M]. New Delhi:
Prentice- Hall of India, 2004
[7] Timmins P F. Failure Control in Process Operations, In: S R Lampman
Ed. Fatigue and Fracture[M]. OH: ASM International, 1997
[8] Rajasekhar A, Madhusudhan G R, Mohandas T, et al. Influence of
Austenitizing Temperature on Microstructure and Mechanical
Properties of AISI 431 Martensitic Stainless Steel Electron Beam
Welds [J]. Materials & Design, 2009, 30 (5): 1 612-1 624
[9] Manova D, Mndl S, Neumann H, et al. Influence of Annealing
Conditions on Ion Nitriding of Martensitic Stainless Steel [J]. Surface
and Coatings Technology, 2006, 200 (22-23): 6 563-6 567
[10] Manova D, Mndl S, Neumann H, et al. Wear Behaviour of Martensitic
Stainless Steel after PIII Surface Treatment[J]. Surface and Coatings
Technology, 2005, 200 (1-4): 137-140
[11] Yuan X, Sun D, Yu H, et al. Preparation of Amorphous-nanocrystalline
Composite Structured Ni-P Electrodeposits[J]. Surface and Coatings
Technology, 2007, 202 (2): 294-300
[12] Santa J F, Baena J C, Toro A. Slurry Erosion of Thermal Spray Coatings
and Stainless Steels for Hydraulic Machinery[J]. Wear, 2007: 263
(1-6): 258-264
[13] Brnic J, Turkalj G, Canadija M, et al. Creep Behavior of High-strength
Low-alloy Steel at Elevated Temperatures[J]. Mat. Sci. Eng. A, 2009,
499 (1-2): 23 - 27
[14] Brnic J, Turkalj G, Canadija M, et al. 50CrMo4 Steel-Determination of
Mechanical Properties at Lowered and Elevated Temperatures, Creep
Behavior and Fracture Toughness Calculation[J]. J. of Engineering
Materials and Technology.-Trans. ASME, 2010, 132 (2): 021 004
[15] Pepelnjak T, Barisic B. Computer-assisted Engineering Determination
of the Formability Limit for Thin Sheet Metals by a Modified
Marciniak Method[J]. Journal of Strain Analysis for Engineering
Design, 2009, 44 (6): 459-472
[16] Brnic J, Turkalj G, Canadija M. Optimal Design Procedure Based on
Viscoplastic Material Behaviour[J]. Acta Metallurgica Sinica, 2000,
13 (2): 587-592
[17] Brnic J, Niu J, G Turkalj G, et al. Behavior of HSLA A709 Steel at
Different Environmental Conditions[J]. Journal of Wuhan University
of Technology-Mater. Sci. Ed., 2010, 25 (6): 897-902
[18] International Standard. Metalic Materials-Tensile Testing at Low
Temperature[S]. ISO 15579:2000(E), 2000
[19] ASTM International. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Metal
Test Methods and Analytical Procedures[M]. Baltimore: ASTM
International, 2012
[20] Zhang L. Failure Assessment of Thin-walled Structures with Particular
Reference to Pipelines[M]. Southampton: WIT Press, 2010
[21] Anderson T L. Fracture Mechanics[M]. New York: CRC Press, 1995
[22] Courtney T H. Fundamental Structure-property Relationships in
Engineering Materials, In S. R. Lampman Ed. Materials Selection and
Design[M].OH: ASM International, 1997
[23] Shekhter A, Kim S, Carr D G, et al. Assesment of Temper Embrittlement
in an Ex-service 1Cr-1Mo-0.25V Power Generating Rotor by Charpy
V-Notch Testing, K
Ic
Fracture Toughness and Small Punch Test[J]. Int.
Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping, 2002, 79 (8-10): 611-615
[24] Roberts R, Newton C. Interpretive Report on Small Scale Test
Correlations with K
Ic
Data[C]. Welding Research Council Bulletins,
1981
[25] Y Chao, J D Ward, R G Sands. Charpy Impact Energy, Fracture
Toughness and Ductile-brittle Transition Temperature of Dual-phase
590 Steel[J]. Materials & Design, 2007, 28(2): 551-557
[26] Farahmand B, Bockrath G, Glassco J. Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics
of High Risk Parts[M]. New York: International Thomson Publishing,
1997