J OURNAL OF MATERI ALS SCI ENCE LETTERS 15 ( 1996) 1697 1699

Another manifestation of dynamic strain ageing

K . G. S A M U E L , S , L . M A N N A N , P. R O D R I G U E Z
Metallurgy and Materials Group, Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomi c Research, Kalpakkam 603 102, India
Dynamic strain ageing (DSA) is a phenomenon
occurring at intermediate strain rates and tempera-
tures, and arises due to interaction of mobile
dislocations with solute atoms. The various mani-
festations of DSA are: (i) a plateau or a hump in the
strength, o; (ii) a peak in the work-hardening, G;
(iii) negative strain rate sensitivity, y; (iv) a peak in
the Hall-Petch constant; K, (v) a ductility minimum
with variation with temperature; and (vi) serrated
plastic flow in the DSA temperature range as shown
in Fig. 1 [1]. Of these, serrated yielding is the only
visible manifestation of DSA. The parameters a~, G,
K~, y, are derived from the flow stress at a fixed
strain. These parameters are dependent on and
sensitive to the dislocation substructure developed
at that strain through dislocation interactions.
Anomalous variation of these parameters with tem-
perature is considered as evidence for DSA.
The increase in strength with plastic strain arises
from dislocation interaction with defects generated
during deformation or with those present initially, in
I I
_ ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~
/ . . _ . 1 1 , \ ,~ E , o o g a t , o n ~
i~i/-~'~
I ] 7
1 \ ,0N--~~r , L . / "
L ~ l . l ' I 0 (7,6
0 Oj e I I ~ ' I
No serrations i DSA region. !. No serration
" - ; ' T y p - - I "
es of i
l ser r at i ons .
i A I A + B I C l
I I D, E I I
1 1
T e mp e r a t u r e
Figure 1 Schematic representation of different manifestations of
dynamic starin ageing [1].
0261-8028 1996 Chapman & Hall
addition to dislocation-dislocation interaction. Yield
stress, Oys, can be considered as the strength of the
initial obstacle structure obstructing the mobile
dislocations from gliding in their slip plane, and
the flow stress, ag, as a yield stress of the strain
hardened material, as shown in Fig. 2. Strain
hardening then actually reveals the change in the
strength of the substructure with plastic deformation.
The strain hardening contribution (Aa) to the flow
stress is then Aa = oe - O y s .
In the alloy the increase in flow strength can be
considered as the sum of the contributions from the
dislocation-dislocation interaction AOda, and from
other sources such as dislocation-precipitation inter-
action AC~dp, and a dynamic strain ageing (DSA)
component due to dislocation-solute interaction
AOds. Hence the increase in flow strength Aa can
be expressed as
Aa = AOdd q- AO' dp q- AOds (1)
The ratio of the flow stress, oe to the yield stress,
Oys is a measure of the strength of the newly
developed substructure relative to the original
substructure. Normally the strength of the material
as well as the strain hardening rate (slope of the
stress-strain curve) decrease with increase in tem-
perature at a given strain due to thermal activation
assisting the applied stress in overeoming the
barriers to dislocation motion. This ratio (adOys) is
expected to increase with strain at a given tempera-
ture and decrease with increase in temperature at a
given strain, as shown schematieally in Fig. 3.
Naturally one would expeet this ratio to increase
with strain, and to saturate towards the plastie strain
axis as the temperature is increased, as shown
schematically in Fig. 3a. This means that (O/ays)~
varies with temperature and strain and depends on
the substructure developed at a given plastic strain,
c O y s - -
~YS f o r s t r a i n s
II
St r a i n
Figure 2 Schematic st ress-st rai n curves on unloading and reloading
during a tensile test.
1 6 9 7
69
T1
I I ms
I
I I T1 < T2 < T3
I I
I I
I i
(a) el s2
Strai n
#2
2
(b) Temperat ure
Figure 3 Schematic variation of the ratio of ftow stress to yield stress
(CdOys) with (a) strain and (b) temperature.
and can also be considered as a substructure
characterizing parameter. If the substrucmre evolved
at any strain or temperature is harder than the
reference substructure, the value of this ratio will be
greater than one, while if a softer Substructure is
evolved, then the value will be less than one. The
latter case can be visualized if dynamic recrystalli-
zation and grain growth occur during testing at
sufficiently high temperatures.
The ratio of flow strength to yield strength or the
relative strength of the newly developed substructure
can be written as
S = ( o/ Oys ) = ] -1- (AO' dd/ O' ys) E -]- (AO-ds/ Oys) E
+(AOdp/oy,) (2)
1698
Austenitic-type 316 stainless steel is known to
exhibit DSA in the temperature range 523-923 K
[2-5]. Although serrated flow was absent at room
temperature, DSA has been considered responsible
for the anomalous yield behaviour during a strain
rate change test or on reloading after a stress
relaxation test [6].
In a normal case where dynamic strain ageing
from dislocation-solute interaction is absent, the
Ba ds contribution would be zero and O/(Ty s would
decrease with temperature. On the other hand, DSA
would lead to an increase in O/Oys with temperature
due to the contribution from (Aods/Oys), and should
show a peak at the peak temperature of DSA and
then decrease with increase in temperature as the
DSA effect diminishes at higher temperatures.
We illustrate the manifestations of DSA on the
variation of the substructure parameter O/ays in
Fig. 4. The experimental details such as material
composition, test procedures, etc., have been des-
cribed elsewhere [7]. In Fig. 4a (a/ays)r is plotted as
a function of temperature for two strain levels 5%
and 10%. The presence of DSA with a DSA peak at
- 800 K is clearly seen.
Figure 4a is from tensile test data at each test
temperature in the as-received (mill annealed)
material. Fig. 4b and 4c show the situations when
the steel was given prior cold work to the indicated
strain levels at room temperature (300 K) by swaging
(Fig, 4b) and tension (Fig. 4c), respectively. For
these two cases, substructure parameter yield
B
1 ~) i I i i
4f ~ I
i
t -
l b)
2 ~ u
I s) i i i i
200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Temperat ure (K)
Figure 4 Temperature dependence of (a) ratio of flow stress to yield
stress for as-received AISI 316 stainless steel. Temperature dependence
of yield strength ratio of material previously cold worked by (b)
swaging and (c) tension, x5%; [] 10%; A 20%; O 30%.
strength r at i o [O'ys(e)/(Tys(AR)] T = [(Oys(e) -- Gys(AR))/
ays(AR)]r + 1.
We are now essentially looking at how the strength
of the substructure developed by cold work at 300 K
varies with temperature. The influence of DSA is
seen in this variation, also with a peak at - 800 K.
In Fig. 5, we illustrate yet another situation. Here
AISI 316 steel was warm worked at 823, 923, 1023
i(d)
2
r.,
200 ~ 00
o
~0o o0oli I
200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Temperature (K)
Figure 5 Temperature dependence of yield strength ratio of AISI 316
stainless steel warm worked at (a) 823 K; (b) 923 K; (c) 1023 K (d)
1123 K. [] 10%; 20%; 30%.
and 1123 K. The yield strength ratio is now [Oys(WW)/
Oys(Aa)]r, which is equal to [(ays(WW)- Oys(AR))/
Oys(AR))]r + 1. The ratio then is a measure of the
strength of the substructure developed at each warm
working temperature and Fig. 5 shows its variation
with temperamre for three different warm working
strain levels. Here we see two clear indications of
DSA; (i) the increase in the yield strength ratio,
peaking at - 800K; (ii) the ratio has maximum
value for the warm working temperature 823 K
which is close to the DSA peak --800K. This
second observation confirms that warm working in
the DSA regime is a potent method of strengthening
[8].
Hence it is concluded that, like other stress-based
parameters, the parameters ratio of flow stress to
yield stress at a given strain (cr/ays) , or ratio of yield
strength of the cold worked material to that of the
reference material at a given temperature (Svs),
when plotted as a function of temperature, reveal
DSA as an anomalous temperature dependence of
these parameters.
References
1. P. RODRIGUEZ, Bull. Mater. Sei. 6 (1984) 653.
2. S. L. MANNAN, K. G. SAMUEL and P. RODRIGUEZ,
Trans. Ind. Inst. Metals. 36 (1983) 313.
3. K. G. SAMUEL, S. L. MANNAN and P. RODRIGUEZ,
Acta. Metall. 36 (1988) 2323.
4. D. BLANC and J. L. STRUDELL, "ICSMA-7", Vol. 1,
edited by McQueen et al. (Pergamon Press, 1985) pp. 349.
5. S. VENKADESAN, P. V. SIVAPRASAD, C. PHANIRAJ
and P. RODRIGUEZ, Z. Metallkunde 84 (1993) 206.
6. S. K. RAY, K. G. SAMUEL and P. RODRIGUEZ, Scripta
Metall. Mater. 27 (1992) 271.
7. K. G. SAMUEL, PhD thesis, Indian Institute of Technology,
Madras (1995).
8. P. RODRIGUEZ, "Encyclopaedia of Materials Science and
Engineering", Supplement Vol. 1, edited by R. W. Cahn
(Pergamon Press, Oxford), pp. 504-508.
Received 8 January
and accepted 17 June 1996
1699