PAMM · Proc. Appl. Math. Mech. 10, 323 – 324 (2010) / DOI 10.1002/pamm.

201010154

Modeling of bainitic phase transformation

Andreas Schneidt1 and Rolf Mahnken1,∗
1
University of Paderborn, Chair of Engineering Mechanics (LTM), Warburger Str. 100, D-33098 Paderborn, Germany

In this work, we present a macroscopic material model for simulation of austenite to bainite and of austenite to martensite
transformations accompanied by transformation-induced plasticity (TRIP), which is an important phenomenon in metal form-
ing processes. In order to account for the incubation time the model considers nucleation of the bainite phase. When this
quantity attains a barrier term, growth of bainite volume fraction is started. The model formulation allows for individual
evolutions of upper and lower bainite. Furthermore, the numerical implementation of the constitutive equations into a finite
element program is described.
c 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

1 Introduction
Dual-phase steels (DPS) are most attractive in car industry and aerospace industry due to the advantages of formability and
lower weight reduction applications. As a result of a combination of higher strength phase such as bainite or martensite with a
softer matrix, such as ferrite, an improved material with enhanced strength and ductility is obtained. Achieving these superior
material properties is mainly a result of the production process. In this way, a new hybrid forming process has been developed
by Steinhoff et al. [5] with the goal of improving the functionality for a low alloy 51CrV4 steel. Here, the mechanical forming
and the heat treatment allow to adjust the desired phase distribution in one step. In order to understand and optimize the
influence of the material properties on the workpiece, it becomes necessary to simulate the entire forming process. Therefore,
in this paper, the macromechanical behavior of phase transformation is investigated, where, being mainly interested in metal
forming processes, the focus is directed to austenite to bainite phase transformation of a low alloy 51CrV4 steel.

2 Model description
In contrast to the martensitic displacive transformation, bainite phase transformations are accompanied by diffusion processes.
Two different cases have to be distinguished: For upper bainite at high temperature there is carbon diffusion within the
austenite followed by carbide precipitation from austenite. For lower bainite at low temperature there is carbon diffusion into
austenite and carbide precipitation in ferrite, followed by carbide precipitation from austenite, [1,2]. As can be observed in the
Time-Temperature-Transformation (TTT) diagram in Fig.1, transformation is delayed after the cooling process. This delayed
time is known as the incubation time. Fig.1 shows the typical growth rate of the second phase in the TTT diagrams following
a C-curve.
Following [2] in the present work the incubation time is related to the process of nucleation. To this end, two different
cases related to upper and lower bainite are considered separately. Here is an example of the formation of upper bainite with
temperature θ > θ ∗ . We let r denote the radius of a nuclei in a homogenized sense. The following evolution equation is
proposed for its growth:

θ > θ ∗ : ṙ = exp [−K1u Z + K2u θ ∗ [ev ] + K3u − K4u Q] . (1)

In this way, the evolution equation is formulated in terms of the chemical force Z and the hardening stress Q. θ ∗ is the
temperature corresponding to the shortest incubation time t∗ in Fig.1. Furthermore, K1u , K2u , K3u , K4u are constants.
Using the expression Z = −ρ0 ∆φch for the chemical driving force with ∆φch = (θ0 − θ)Q∗ /θ0 , the relation Q =
Q0 (1 − exp [−bev ]) + Hev [4] and further reformulation renders the following evolution equation for nucleation of a bainitic
phase with an asymmetric C-curve:
 
|θ − θ ∗ [ev ]|
ṙ = α2 exp − exp [−β2 ev ] . (2)
B
There B = Bu for upper bainite (θ > θ ∗ ) and B = Bl for lower bainite (θ < θ ∗ ), α2 , β2 are material parameters. The evolution
equation (2) has been introduced in [2] on the basis of an empirical argument. To the authors knowledge, the derivation of
this relation on the basis of driving forces and individual approaches for upper and lower bainite has not been given in the
literature before.
∗ Corresponding author E-mail: rolf.mahnken@ltp.upb.de, Phone: +49 5251 60 2283, Fax: +49 5251 60 3483

c 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

324 Section 6: Material Modelling in Solid Mechanics

Fig. 1 Time-Temperature-Transformation (TTT) dia-

gram for a low alloy 51CrV4 steel Fig. 2 Evolution of volume fraction of bainite phase,
isothermal at 340◦ C for a low alloy 51CrV4 steel

Experimental results of an isothermal Time Temperature Transformation diagram (Data sheet 1.8159 Dörrenberg Edelstahl
GmbH) were used for identification of material parameters, which represent the nucleation of bainite phase (incubation time).
The results of parameter identification for the asymmetric C-curves can be observed in Fig.1.

2.1 Evolution of volume fraction of bainite

Following [2], when the radius of a bainite particle r is greater than a barrier term r ∗ , the volume fraction of bainite, denoted
by z, is formed. In our approach it is related to the chemical driving force Z, and following [2] to an activation energy G∗ .
Furthermore, as mentioned in [2], the position relative to θ ∗ in Figure 1 is also of importance. In this way, the following
evolution equation is proposed:
  n
G∗ r − r∗ γ
ż = exp −K5 Z + K6 θ [ev ] −
∗
(1 − z) , (3)
Rθ r
where K5 , K6 , n, γ are constants. The notation < x >= x for x > 0, < x >= 0 for x ≤ 0 ensures, that volume fraction
evolves only if the bainite radius r reaches the critical value r ∗ . The minus sign in front of K5 takes into account, that Z =
−ρ0 ∆φch is negative. As mentioned in [2] the corresponding time at r = r ∗ is the incubation time. The term 1 − z serves
as an upper barrier function and ensures that the bainite volume fraction varies from zero to one. Using the expression for the
Q∗
chemical driving force with ∆φch = (θ0 − θ) , the relation Q = Q0 (1 − exp [−bev ]) + Hev and a further reformulation,
θ0
Eq.(3) rewrites as
 ∗    n
θ [ev ] − θ G∗ r − r∗
ż = A5 exp exp − (1 − z)γ , (4)
B1 Rθ r
where
1 1 A1 θ0 ∆θ 0.5
1. = = K5 ρ0 Q∗ , 3. r ∗ = ,
B1 K6 θ∆θQ∗ + A2 θ0 ev σv
(5)
A3 θ02 ∆θ 1.5
2. A5 = exp [K5 ρ0 Q∗ ] , 4. G∗ = 2.
(∆θQ∗ + A4 θ0 ev σv )
Furthermore, σv is the equivalent von Mises stress, and A1 , A2 , A3 , A5 , n, γ are material constants, that are calculated by
means of experiment results from [3] with a Simplex Nelder algorithm. The resulting good agreement between experimental
and simulated data is observed in Fig.2.

Acknowledgements This paper is based on investigations of the collaborative research center SFB/TR TRR 30, which is kindly supported
by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG).

References
[1] H. K. D. H. Bhadeshia, Bainite in Steels, Transformations, Microstructure and Properties, University Press, Cambridge, 2003.
[2] R. P. Garrett, S. Xu, J. Lin, T A. Dean, A model for predicting austenite to bainite phase transformation in producing dual phase steels,
Int. J. of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 44, 831-837, 2004.
[3] H.-G. Lambers, S. Tschumak, H.J. Maier, C. Canadinc, Role of Austenitization and Pre-Deformation on the Kinetics of the Isothermal
Bainitic Transformation The Minerals, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 40, 1355-1366, 2009.
[4] R. Mahnken, A. Schneidt, A Thermodynamic Framework and Numerical Aspects for Transformation-Induced Plasticity at Large
Strains, Archives of Mechanics, 80, 229-253, 2010.
[5] K. Steinhoff, U. Weidig, B. Scholtes, W. Zinn,, Innovative Flexible Metal Forming Processes based on Hybrid Thermo-Mechanical
Interaction, Steel Research Int., 76, 154-159, 2005.

c 2010 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

www.gamm-proceedings.com