Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia CIRP 46 (2016) 331 – 335

7th HPC 2016 – CIRP Conference on High Performance Cutting

Influence of machining on the microstructure, mechanical properties

and corrosion behaviour of a low carbon martensitic stainless steel
S. Bissey-Bretona,c, V. Vignalb,c*, F. Herbstb,c, J.B. Couderta,b,c
a
CEA Valduc, 21120 Is sur Tille, FRANCE
b
ICB UMR 6303 CNRS, Université Bourgogne-Franche Comté, BP 47870, 21078 Dijon, FRANCE
c
LIMPE (Interaction Matériau-Procédé-Environnement), LRC DAM-VA-11-02, Dijon, FRANCE
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +33-03-80-39-61-60. E-mail address: vincent.vignal@u-bourgogne.fr.

Abstract

The influence of cutting conditions of a low carbon martensitic stainless steel (15.5wt.% Cr, 4.8% Ni, 1% Mo, 0.9%
Mn, 0.24% Si, 0.1% Cu, < 0.06% C and 77.46% Fe) on the microstructure is first studied using electron backscatter
diffraction and transmission electron microscopy. The mechanical and corrosion behaviours of this stainless steel are
then investigated. It was found that the microstructure is significantly affected near the machined surface. The
formation of grain sub-boundaries or a refinement of the microstructure is observed depending on cutting
conditions. Both lead to an increase of the hardness. In addition, the microstructure refinement yields to a huge
increase of the average pit surface area. By contrast the average pit density is not affected by machining conditions.

©©2016
2016 The Authors.
The Published
Authors. by Elsevier
Published B.V This isB.V.
by Elsevier an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the International Scientific Committee of 7th HPC 2016 in the person of the Conference
Peer-review under responsibility of the International Scientific Committee of 7th HPC 2016 in the person of the Conference Chair
Chair Prof. Matthias Putz.
Prof. Matthias Putz

Keywords: machining; stainless steel; corrosion; mechanical properties.

2212-8271 © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the International Scientific Committee of 7th HPC 2016 in the person of the Conference Chair
Prof. Matthias Putz
doi:10.1016/j.procir.2016.04.016
332 S. Bissey-Breton et al. / Procedia CIRP 46 (2016) 331 – 335
1. Introduction
Machining is used in numerous industrial sectors to
produce workpieces with required shape, dimensions, and
surface finish (surface characteristics such as roughness and
subsurface characteristics such as texture, residual stresses
and microstructure). One of the great challenges of modern
machining is to optimise surface finish for the increase of the
performance and lifetime of workpieces. Numerous
experimental studies have quantified the influence of cutting
parameters on the surface and sub-surface characteristics of
metallic alloys [1,2].
By contrast, only a few experimental investigations have
been carried out to study the performance of workpieces
machined under different cutting conditions and it would be
interesting to link both. This includes the mechanical
behaviour [3], the resistance to crack initiation and
propagation [4] under external loading and the corrosion
behaviour [5,6].
Martensitic stainless steels (MMS) have a complex
microstructure composed of martensite laths, austenite film
between laths and ferrite islands. It is therefore interesting to
quantify the influence of machining on the surface finish and
the performance of this complex microstructure. The surface
roughness produced by turning of MMS was already
measured [7]. In a previous work [8], it was found that
machined samples made of MSS can be classified into three
categories based on the observable deformation: samples with
severe observable deformation, noticeable observable
deformation and no observable deformation. The observable
deformation was qualitatively assessed from optical
observations of cross-sections using ferrite islands as
deformation indicators. It was also found [8] that severe
observable deformation is generated under machining
performed with the highest value of the feed rate, f. By
contrast, there is no observable deformation in two
configurations: machining with the lowest value of f or
machining with intermediary values of f and the lowest value
of the cutting speed, Vc.
In the present study, microstructural changes induced by
machining of MSS are quantified by means of electron
backscatter diffraction (EBSD) and transmission electron
microscopy (TEM). Samples representative of the first (severe
observable deformation) and the third (no observable
deformation) categories were selected. The corrosion
behaviour of these two samples was then evaluated using the
potentiostatic pulse technique (PPT). Obtained results were
discussed considering microstructural changes determined
previously and machining conditions (values of f and Vc).
2. Experimental
The studied material is a low carbon MSS. Its chemical
composition is (wt.%): 15.5% Cr, 4.8% Ni, 1% Mo, 0.9% Mn,
0.24% Si, 0.1% Cu, < 0.06% C and 77.4% Fe. The material
underwent a heat treatment at 1040°C, followed by an oil
quenching, and a tempering treatment at 570°C.
Investigations were carried out on two machined samples
extracted from the non-orthogonal design of experiments
described in [8]: Sample #1 with no observable deformation (f
= 0.1 mm/tr and Vc = 73 m/min) and Sample #2 with severe
observable deformation (f = 0.3 mm/tr and Vc = 182 m/min).
In both cases, the depth of cut was set at 4 mm and no
lubricant was used.
The orientation of grains was determined on cross-section
surfaces using the INCA Crystal EBSD System coupled with
a field emission scanning electron microscope (JEOL JSM-
6400F). EBSD measurements were performed with a step of
30 nm. The grain angle tolerance was set at 15°. Surfaces
were ground (emery papers), smoothed (diamond pastes). A
specific vibratory polishing was then carried out (VibroMet 2
vibratory polisher from Buehler).
FE-TEM investigations were carried out using a JEOL
JEM-2100 microscope with a LaB6 source operating at 200
kV. For sample preparation, classical grinding, polishing and
dimpling methods (Dimple Grinder Model 656 from Gatan)
followed by ion beam milling (PIPS Model 691 from Gatan)
were used on the opposite face to obtain a sample thickness
that would be transparent to high energy electrons.
Corrosion tests were carried in 0.1M NaCl at 25°C using
the PPT method [9]. It consists in applying a potential of 1 V
vs. SCE for 3 s and then a potential of 0 V vs. SCE (passive
behaviour) for 2 s (30 cycles). The specimen surface was
cleaned in ethanol under ultrasonics and the zone of interest
was observed by optical microscopy. Surface defects existing
before machining were identified before the PPT test.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Microstructural changes in MMS after machining
EBSD analysis was first performed on Sample #1 (no
observable deformation). The IPF map (Fig. 1(a)) does not
reveal any preferential orientation and any grain refinement in
the close vicinity of the machined surface. By contrast, the
 S. Bissey-Breton et al. / Procedia CIRP 46 (2016) 331 – 335 333

GOS/KAM maps (Fig. 1(b)) show that the density of grain corrosion resistance of the machined surface is then
sub-boundaries is significantly increased in a thin volume significantly decreased [8].
close to the surface. The thickness of the affected sublayer TEM investigations were then performed in the bulk (no
was estimated to 2 µm. It can also be observed that some machining) and in Sample #2, as shown in Fig. 4(a) and 4(b)
grains emerging at the surface are defined by an extremely respectively. In both cases, the width of 50 laths was
high value of the GOS (values greater than 10°, corresponding measured. In the bulk, the width of laths extends from 0.4 µm
to yellow, orange and red grains in Fig. 1(b)). These grains over several micrometers. By contrast, the width of laths in
contain a high density of dislocations. By comparison, the Sample #2 is in the range of 40-600 nm (Fig. 5). The average
GOS of grains in the bulk does not exceed 10° (green and width is 0.24 µm. Therefore, TEM results confirm that
blue grains in Fig. 1(b)). Although no observable deformation significantly elongation of laths occurred during machining.
was observed (soft machining conditions), microstructural
changes occur near the surface during machining. machined surface
(a)
The Vickers hardness was then determined on the
machined surface. The penetration depth of the indenter was
first calculated from geometrical considerations. It was
estimated to 1.2 µm. The penetration depth is then roughly
twice lower than the thickness of the affected layer (of about 2
µm). The hardness values derived from these measurements
were then representative of the affected sublayer. A hardness
value of 423r10 HV0.01 was found (instead of 390r10 HV0.01 10 µm
in the bulk). The slight increase of hardness in the sublayer is
(b)
mainly attributed to the increase of the grain sub-boundaries
observed by means of EBSD (Fig. 1(b)). These results show
that even though no deformation was observed by optical
limit of the
microscopy (soft machining conditions with the lowest value affected layer
of f) microstructural changes may occur. Previous results [8]
indicate that the increase of hardness induces a decrease of the 10 µm
pitting potential of the machined surface.
EBSD analysis of Sample #2 (severe observable
deformation) shows that the martensite laths are highly Fig. 1. EBSD analysis of sample #1: (a) inverse pole figure (IPF) map and (b) grain
elongated in the direction of machining (Fig. 2). A very fine orientation spread (GOS) and Kernel average misorientation (KAM) maps
microstructure with a high density of grain boundaries is then
present near the surface. The thickness of the affected machined surface
sublayer is at least 10 µm. The quality of EBSD maps was
lower than in the previous case, confirming that large
deformation occurred. The hardness value obtained on this
machined surface was 498r10 HV0.01. This value is
significantly greater than that measured on Sample #1 and in
the bulk. It was associated with the grain refinement
observable in Fig. 2.
The presence of ferrite islands in the sublayer affects 5 µm
significantly the deformation process. Upstream of the island,
laths are highly elongated (site A in Fig. 3(a)). When the Fig. 2. EBSD analysis of sample #2: inverse pole figure (IPF) map
thickness of the affected sublayer between the machined
surface and the ferrite island becomes very low, laths are Machining performed with the lowest value of f or the
destroyed. Grains with a globular shape and an equivalent intermediary value of f and the lowest value of Vc yields the
diameter in the sub-micrometer range are then formed (Fig. formation of grain sub-boundaries in a 2 µm-thick sublayer
3(b)). This indicates that strain concentrations certainly exist and a slight increase of the hardness. By contrast, machining
at this location during machining. Downstream of the ferrite performed with the highest value of f yields microstructure
island, laths are not highly elongated (site B in Fig. 3(a)). It refinement in a thick sublayer (thickness of about 10 µm) and
seems that the ferrite undergoes deformation instead of laths. significant increase of hardness. So we can affirm that the
Indeed, numerous grain sub-boundaries are formed in the feed rate f has an important impact on the microstructure of
ferrite and orientation gradients developed (Fig. 3(a)-(b)). the final workpiece, and as a consequence on the corrosion
These results show that severe machining conditions can behavior of the machined surface.
lead to significant microstructural changes and significant
increase of the hardness. Note that DSC results (not shown 3.2. Corrosion behaviour of machined samples
here) demonstrate that no phase transformation occurs during
machining of MSS (under these selected conditions). The After PPT, optical images of the specimen surface were
recorded using a Nikon Eclipse LV150A upright metallurgical
334 S. Bissey-Breton et al. / Procedia CIRP 46 (2016) 331 – 335

microscope. These optical images were then assembled to The pit surface area is the range of 30-240 µm2 for Sample
produce a two-dimensional reconstruction of the machined #1 (Fig. 6(a)) and 20-560 µm2 for Sample #2 (Fig. 6(b)). Pits
surface. Obtained pictures were treated using the Photoshop can be significantly larger in Sample #2 (machined with the
software package. The distribution of the pit surface areas at highest value of f). The average values of the pit surface area
the mouth was then determined for the two samples (Fig. 6). are reported in Table 1. These values are compared to that
obtained for the bulk material (no machining) which was
machined surface previously polished using diamond pastes (down to 1 µm).
(a) Formation of numerous grain sub-boundaries (Sample #1)
yields to slight increase of this parameter (increase of about
50% vs. the bulk material). By contrast, the microstructure
site A
refinement observed in Sample #2 yields to huge increase of
site B
this parameter, of about 260% vs. the bulk material. Therefore
machining conditions (even for low values of f and Vc) affect
significantly the average pit surface area.
The average pit density is also reported in Table 1.
Roughly the same value was found for both machined
samples. This shows that the average pit density is not
15 µm affected by machining conditions. It can also be seen that this
parameter is significantly lower after machining than on the
(b) bulk material. The difference is of about 80%. This may be
explained by the fact that machined surfaces may be under
compression. It is well known that compressive stresses have
beneficial effects on pitting corrosion.

12

10
(a) Sample#1
Number of pits

8
Fig. 3. EBSD analysis of sample #2: (a-b) inverse pole figure (IPF) map in a site 6
containing a ferrite island 4

2
(a) (b) 0
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240
Pit surface area at the mouth (µm²)
8
7
6
Number of pits

5 (b) Sample#2
4
500 nm 400 nm 3
2
1
Fig. 4. TEM images of the low carbon martensitic stainless steel: (a) no machining (in 0
0 35 70 105 140 175 210 245 280 315 350 385 420 455 490 525 560
the dark field mode) and (b) Sample #2 (in the bright field mode)
Pit surface area at the mouth (µm²)

12
Fig. 6. Distribution of the Pit surface area for : (a) Sample #1 and (b) Sample #2
10
Number of laths

Table1. Numerical values derived from PPT test

8
Average pit surface Average pit
6 area (µm2) density (pit/mm2)
Sample #1 94 15
4 Sample #2 224 13
2
Bulk material 62 67

0 4. Conclusions
0
40
80
120
160
200
240
280
320
360
400
440
480
520
560
600

Width (nm) Microstructural changes were found in MMS after

machining: formation of grain sub-boundaries in a thin
Fig. 5. Width of laths vs. number of laths in Sample #2 affected sublayer for soft machining conditions "lowest value
of f" and refinement of the microstructure for severe
machining conditions "highest value of f".
 S. Bissey-Breton et al. / Procedia CIRP 46 (2016) 331 – 335 335

In both cases, the hardness was significantly increased. The

highest values of hardness was found when the microstructure
refinement occurs. The corrosion behaviour of the surface was
also affected by machining. The average pit density is not
affected by machining conditions. By contrast, the
microstructure refinement (highest value of f) yields to a huge
increase of the average pit surface area.
These results show that machining conditions play a
significant role in the surface integrity and corrosion
behaviour of MMS.

5. Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the Conseil Régional

de Bourgogne (France) for its financial support and people
from CEA for their contribution to this work through DSC
experiments or help in modelling.

6. References

[1] Gökkaya, H., Nalbant, M., 2007. The effects of cutting

tool geometry and processing parameters on the surface
roughness of AISI 1030 steel, Materials and Design, 28, p.
717.
[2] M’Saoubi, R., Outeiro, J.C., Changeux, B., Lebrun, J.L.,
Morão Dias, M., 1999. Residual stress analysis in orthogonal
machining of standard and resulfurized AISI 316L steels,
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 96, p. 225.
[3] Javidi, A., Rieger, U., Eichlseder, W., 2008. The effect of
machining on the surface integrity and fatigue life,
International Journal of Fatigue, 30, p. 2050.
[4] Ihara, R., Katsuyama, J., Onizawa, K., Hashimoto, T.,
Mikami, Y., Mochizuki, M., 2011. Prediction of residual
stress distributions due to surface machining and welding and
crack growth simulation under residual stress distribution,
Nuclear Engineering and Design, 241, p. 1335.
[5] Gravier, J., Vignal, V., Bissey-Breton, S., 2012. Influence
of residual stress, surface roughness and crystallographic
texture induced by machining on the corrosion behaviour of
copper in salt-fog atmosphere, Corrosion Science, 61, p.162.
[6] Gravier, J., Vignal, V., Bissey-Breton, S., Farre, J., 2008.
The use of linear regression methods and Pearson’s
correlation matrix to identify mechanical-physicalchemical
parameters controlling the micro-electrochemical behaviour
of machined copper, Corrosion Science, 50, p. 2885.
[7] Thamizhmanii, S., Bin Omar, B., Saparudin, S., Hasan, S.,
2008. Surface roughness analyses on hard martensitic
stainless steel by turning, Journal of Achievements in
Materials and Manufacturing Engineering, 26, p. 139.
[8] Vignal, V., Bissey-Breton, S., Coudert, J.B., 2014.
Mechanical properties and corrosion behaviour of low carbon
martensitic stainless steel after machining, International
Journal of Machining and Machinability of Materials, 15, p.
36.
[9] Vignal, V., Richoux, V., Suzon, E., Thiebaut, S., Tabaleiv,
K., 2015. The use of potentiostatic pulse testing to study the
corrosion behaviour of welded stainless steels in sodium
chloride solution, Materials and Design, 88, p. 186.