Materials and Design 31 (2010) 1360–1364

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matdes

Determination of critical strain for initiation of dynamic recrystallization

Soheil Solhjoo
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Using the work hardening rate–strain curves, an effective mathematical model has been developed to
Received 25 April 2009 predict the stress–strain curves of alloy steel during hot deformation up to the peak stress regardless
Accepted 2 September 2009 of the level of the strain, weather smaller or larger than the critical strain. This model is expressed in
Available online 6 September 2009
terms of peak stress, peak strain and one temperature-sensitive parameter, S. In addition, one new model,
which is a function of peak strain, was proposed to predict the critical strain for the initiation of dynamic
Keywords: recrystallization using the second derivative of work hardening rate with respect to stress. Besides the
A. Ferrous metals and alloys
theoretical study, the analysis is used to determine the stress–strain curves and critical strain of 304
C. Forming
F. Plastic behavior
austenitic stainless steel. The predicted results were found to be in accord with the experimental data.
Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction In this investigation, the stress–strain curve up to the peak

The understanding of metals and alloys behavior at hot defor-
mation condition has a great importance for designers of metal
forming processes because of its effective role on metal flow pat-
tern as well as the kinetics of metallurgical transformation [1,2].
It is also essential for quantitatively analyzing deformation pro-
cesses [3]. Meanwhile, the fast development of computing tech-
niques led to a wide application of FEM simulation to study
forming processes and numerical simulations can be truly reliable
only when a proper material flow stress relationship is built [4].
Experimental tests to find the flow stress of alloys at different load-
ing conditions, i.e. various strain rates and temperatures, are nec-
essary but very expensive and time consuming. Therefore, the
development of mathematical models to predict the stress–strain
curves under different forming conditions is of great importance
and also necessary to improve the practices of industrial forming
processes at high temperatures [5]. Many researchers tried to mod-
el the stress–strain curves for different alloys. The main difference
of these models is the degree to which they are derived from the
physical theories. In general, for a given material, flow stress is a
function of strain, strain rate and temperature.
Work hardening and dynamic recovery control the flow stress
up to the maximum stress. Dynamic recrystallization (DRX) occurs
before the maximum stress and many researchers have worked at
determining the exact point of the onset of DRX on the stress–
strain curve, i.e. the critical strain [6–12]. They suggested different
methods in order to evaluate the value of critical strain but only
Ebrahimi and Solhjoo [6] derived a mathematical equation to
determine directly this value.
stress is formulated in terms of peak stress (rP ) and peak strain
(eP ) and one temperature-sensitive parameter, S, which was deter-
mined by linear estimation of work hardening rate–strain curve.
Utilizing the second derivative of work hardening rate with respect
to stress, a model is presented to determine the critical strain (eC )
for the onset of DRX. This analysis is used to determine the stress–
strain curves and critical strain of 304 austenitic stainless steel. Re-
sults show a good agreement between the predicted and the exper-
imental results with a high level of accuracy.
2. Initiation of DRX
Flow stress is a function of dislocation density [13]. The dynamic
recrystallization occurs during deformation and when the strain ex-
ceeds critical strain. The driving force is the removal of dislocations.
Before the stress reach the peak stress, the work hardening and dis-
location density increase, which will lead to a critical microstruc-
tural condition, i.e. new grains nucleate and new high-angle
boundaries grow. Gradually, the dislocation density increases in
other areas as well. Therefore, the flow stress increases up to a max-
imum value but the increasing rate continuously decreases and the
rate of softening mechanism prevails over the work hardening
afterwards. This phenomenon usually occurs for metals with low
to medium stacking fault energy (SFE) [14]. The higher the temper-
ature and the lower the strain rate, the more obvious the influence
of DRX on the flow behavior [9] and thus the plasticity rises [15,16].
3. Modeling of flow stress curve up to the peak

The slope of stress–strain curve determined at constant strain

E-mail address: soheilsolhjoo@yahoo.com rate and temperature corresponds to the work hardening rate, i.e.

0261-3069/$ - see front matter Ó 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2009.09.001
 S. Solhjoo / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 1360–1364

h ¼ @@re T;e_ . In this investigation the slope of the work hardening rate
is taken into account in order to have a useful relationship between
stress and strain up to the peak. A linear estimation of h—e curve up
to the peak strain can be expressed by the following equation:
@r
¼ Ae þ C ð1Þ
@e
where A is the slope of the line and C is a constant. Using the root of
the h—e curve (e ¼ eP ; h ¼ 0), value of constant C is obtained to be
AeP . Solution of the differential Eq. (1) with respect to e, using
boundary condition r ¼ rP at e ¼ eP is:
  S
r e e
¼ 2 ð2Þ
rP eP eP
where rP is the peak stress, eP is the peak strain and S is an addi-
tional parameter in order to make the results of the model accept-
able and must be determined for each metal. Determination of S can
  h  i
be simply done by fitting a line plot of ln rrP vs. ln eeP 2  eeP ; S
would be the slope of the line. These plots shows that S is a function
  h  i
of temperature, so it is better to plot ln rrP vs. ln eeP 2  eeP for
each sets of temperatures and then using following relationship S
can be found at any temperature:
S ¼ a þ bT ð3Þ
where T is the absolute temperature and a and b are constants.
Using a plot of S vs. T, constants a and b can be determined. It is also
possible to assume S as a constant, but it shows a slight deviation
from the experiments and is suitable when there is not enough data
  h  i
points in order to make plots of ln rrP vs. ln eeP 2  eeP for each
sets of temperature.
4. Critical strain for the onset of DRX
The critical strain for the onset of DRX can be determined
metallographically from the observation of microstructure of
quenched specimens. This technique is requires a large number
of specimens with different deformation degree. However, the crit-
ical strain thus obtained is not precise because it is based solely on
energetic considerations of stored energy (dislocation density)
within the body reaching a critical value [10]. Perdrix and his col-
leagues found that the h—r curve may be divided into successive
linear portions with a negative slope up to the maximum point
of the h—r curve (r ¼ rP ; h ¼ 0) [17]. Ryan and McQueen observed
an inflection in the h—r curve where DRX is initiated [18]. Poliak
and Jonas suggested that the energetic consideration is not suffi-
cient [10]. Based on the principles of irreversible thermodynamics,
it was suggested that besides the consideration of stored energy, it
is necessary to consider the kinetics of the process. The former
necessitates the stored energy to attain a maximum value and
the latter requires the dissipation rate to reach a minimum. This
can be quantified in terms of the minimum of the absolute value
of the rate of hardening rate, ddhr. This can be calculated from h—r
data and plotted as a function of stress. The minimum point of
dh
 r curve is where DRX is initiated. The stress to initiation can
dr
be identified and hence the corresponding strain to initiation can
be obtained from the corresponding stress–strain curve.
Mathematically, the minimum point of a ddhr  r curve can be
calculated from the first derivative of ddhr with respect to r, which
is the same as the inflection in a h—r curve that is equivalent to
a null value of the second derivative of h with respect to r [7].
2
d @@re
¼0 ð4Þ
dr2
1361
Therefore, in order to solve Eq. (4) the first step is to find the
derivation of Eq. (2):
 
@r 1 1
¼ Sr þ ð5Þ
@e e e  2eP
By solving Eq. (4) the critical strain can be found as a function of
the peak strain. The solution can be expressed as:
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
eC 1 6ðS  1Þ þ 2 S2  6S þ 5
RC ¼ ¼ 1  42 ð6Þ
eP 2 2S  1
where eC is the critical strain for initiation of DRX and RC is named
critical ratio. Using numerical methods or L’Hospital’s rule, it is
found that when S = 0.5 the value of RC equals 0.423.
As a result, if the flow stress equation for different alloys is
available in the form of Eq. (2), the exact amount of the critical
strain could be calculated directly from Eq. (6).
5. Mathematical analysis of flow stress curves
According to the experimental results of 304 austenitic stainless
steel in the literature [19], all flow curves display a rapid initial in-
crease to a maximum stress, characterized by a peak strain and a
peak stress, followed by a gradual fall to a steady state stress. To
be able to estimate the flow curves, the stress must be determined
  h  i
from Eq. (2). A linear plot of ln rrP vs. ln eeP 2  eeP , as depicted
in Fig. 1a, shows that the value of S varies with temperature. Fig. 1b
shows the relationship between S and T and from this, Eq. (3)
changes into:
S ¼ 1:234  0:0007T ð7Þ
The experimental test results used in this work [19] are in a
range of temperature between 900 °C and 1200 °C. From Eq. (7)
it is found that the value of parameter S changes between 0.41
and 0.2 and Eq. (6) shows a range for RC between 0.44 and 0.48.
The Arrhenius equation is widely used to describe the relation-
ship between the strain rate, flow stress and temperature, espe-
cially at high temperatures. Also, the effects of the temperatures
and strain rate on the deformation behaviors can be represented
by Zener–Hollomon parameter in an exponent-type equation. At
high temperatures that flow stress has a low value, the power
law in Arrhenius type equation gives good approximations be-
tween Zener–Hollomon parameter and flow stress [20].
 
Q def
e_ ¼ BrnP exp  ð8Þ
RT
where e_ is strain rate, B and n are constants, Q def is the hot deforma-
tion activation energy, R is the universal gas constant. Fig. 2a and b
show diagrams used to find the value of constant n and Q def at the
peak, respectively, utilizing the method expressed elsewhere
[21,22]. By using a linear plot of ln ðe_ Þ vs. ln ðrÞ, the value of constant
n can be obtained, which is 7.214 at the peak. By plotting ln ðrÞ vs.
1000
, the hot deformation activation energy for the peak evaluates to
nRT
be 372.7 kJ. mol–1. To determine the constant B, y-intercept of the
h  i
Q
plot ln ðrÞ vs. ln e_ exp RTdef is evaluated as 1. Therefore, for the
peak stress Eq. (8) becomes:
 
372700
e_ ¼ r7:214
P exp  ð9Þ
8:314 T
For verification of stress and strain up to the peak, the value of
peak strain is also needed. It is possible to formulate this value as a
function of modified Zenner–Hollomon parameter in this form
[21]:
1362 S. Solhjoo / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 1360–1364

Fig. 2. Dependence of (a) peak stress on strain rate at different temperatures and
Fig. 1. (a) Determination of constant S in Eq. (2) (dotted lines are best fit lines). (b) (b) peak stress on 1000
nRT
at different strain rates.
Relationship between temperature and S.

6. Discussion
eP ¼ aZ bm ð10Þ
In this investigation the value of Qdef at the peak stress is evalu-
where a and b are constants equal to 0.06 and 0.07 for the material ated to be 372.7 kJ. mol–1 which is close to 380 kJ. mol–1 reported
used in this work and Zm is the modified Zenner–Hollomon by Cho et al., for 304 austenitic stainless steel [23]. The method they
parameter. used is different. They determined the activation energy with the
It has been shown that modified Zener–Hollomon parameter aid hot-working relationship proposed by Sellars and Tegart [24]:
can be expressed as [21]:  
  Q def
Q def Z ¼ e_ exp ¼ A½sinh ðarP Þ ð13Þ
Z m ¼ e_ m Z ¼ e_ 1þm exp ð11Þ RT
RT
where Z is Zenner–Hollomon parameter and m is a constant which where A, a and n are constants. The activation energy could be
in found to be 0.32 for 304 austenitic stainless steel. Therefore, the determined with the following relationship which is fully described
value of peak strain can be found from the following equation: by Medina and Hernandez [25–28].
  0:07  
273700 @ ln sinh ðarP Þ
eP ¼ 0:06 e_ 1:32 exp ð12Þ Q def ¼ Rn ð14Þ
8:314 T @ lnð1=TÞ
 S. Solhjoo / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 1360–1364 1363

But in this investigation another method [21,22] is employed

which is easier to use. The variations in activation energy of aus-
tenite are due to the atomic fraction of each solute, its relative vol-
ume to iron and its heat of sublimation [25].
The stress–strain curves obtained from the presented model
and the other investigator’s experimental results [19] are shown
in Fig. 3a and b. Using the experimental values of peak stress and
peak strain, Eq. (2) is plotted for different strain rates at 900 °C
(Fig. 3a) while Fig. 3b illustrates the predicted results at different
temperatures and a strain rate of 10 s1, in which the values of
peak stress and peak strain were calculated respectively from
Eqs. (9) and (12). Obviously, the experimental flow curves show
a good correlation with those predicted by presented model.
Fig. 4 shows a plot of h—r for different strain rates at 900 °C. In
this figure, Eq. (5) is plotted for a comparison with experimental
data. The results show that the model is in accord with the exper-

Fig. 4. Comparison between experimental (points) and predicted (hashed lines)

work hardening plots at 900 °C with different strain rates.

iments. Using Eq. (6) the value of RC is determined in a range of

0.44–0.48. Stewart et al. used the similar method to find the critical
ratio [29]. They found the critical stress by investigating the mini-
mum in plots of ddhr vs. r. Once the stress at the critical point has
been identified in these plots, it can be used to determine the crit-
ical strain. They reported values between 0.47 and 0.55 for RC [29].
These values are in a good agreement with the values calculated
from Eq. (6).

7. Conclusion

1. The stress–strain curves up to peak stress at high temperature

is modeled on the basis of the linear estimation of h—e curve,
with a modification by introducing an additional temperature-
sensitive parameter, S. This mathematical model is simple and
easy to use. Furthermore, the predicted stresses are regardless
of the level of the strain, whether smaller or larger than the crit-
ical strain. The model has been examined for 304 austenitic
stainless steel and the results show a good agreement between
measured and predicted flow curves.
2. A mathematical equation is presented to directly determine the
critical strain for the onset of DRX as a function of peak strain.
This equation is derived from the second derivative of h with
respect to r. Using this formula, the critical ratio of 304 austen-
itic stainless steel is evaluated to be 0.44–0.48, which is in
accord with 0.47–0.55 reported by other researchers [29].

Acknowledgment

Author is grateful to Professor Y.C. Lin at School of Mechanical

and Electrical Engineering, Central South University, China for con-
structive comments.

References

Fig. 3. Comparison between experimental and predicted flow curves (a) for
different strain rates at 900 °C and (b) at different temperatures and a strain rate
of 10 s1.
[1] Lin YC, Chen MS. Study of microstructural evolution during metadynamic
recrystallization in a low-alloy steel. Mater Sci Eng A 2009;501:229–34.
[2] Lin YC, Chen MS, Zhong J. Constitutive modeling for elevated temperature flow
behavior of 42CrMo steel. Comput Mater Sci 2008;42:470–7.
[3] Rao KP, Prasad YKDV, Hawbolt EB. Hot deformation studies on a low-carbon
steel: part 1 - flow curves and the constitutive relationship. J Mater Process
Technol 1996;56:897–907.
1364 S. Solhjoo / Materials and Design 31 (2010) 1360–1364
[4] Li P, Xue KM, Lu Y, Tan JR. Neural network prediction of flow stress of Ti–15–3
alloy under hot compression. J Mater Process Technol 2004;148:235–8.
[5] Jorge Jr AM, Regone W, Balancin O. Effect of competing hardening and
softening mechanisms on the flow stress curve modeling of ultra-low carbon
steel at high temperatures. J Mater Process Technol 2003;142:415–21.
[6] Ebrahimi R, Solhjoo S. Characteristic points of stress-strain curve at high
temperature. Int J ISSI 2007;4:24–7.
[7] Poliak EI, Jonas JJ. Initiation of dynamic recrystallization in constant strain rate
hot deformation. ISIJ Int 2003;43:684–91.
[8] Barnett MR, Kelly GL, Hodgson PD. Predicting the critical strain for dynamic
recrystallization using the kinetics of static recrystallization. Scripta Mater
2000;43:365–9.
[9] Sun WP, Hawbolt EB. Comparison between static and metadynamic
recrystallization – an application to the hot rolling of steels. ISIJ Int
1997;37:1000–9.
[10] Poliak EI, Jonas JJ. A one-parmenter approach to determining the critical
conditions for the initiation of dynamic recrystallization. Acta Mater
1996;44:127–36.
[11] Cingara A, McQueen HJ. New formula for calculating flow curves from high
temperature constitutive data for 300 austenitic steels. J Mater Process
Technol 1992;36:31–42.
[12] Laasraoui A, Jonas JJ. Prediction of steel flow stresses at high temperature and
strain rates. Metall Trans A 1991;22:1545–58.
[13] Dieter GE. Mechanical metallurgy. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1987.
[14] Ueki M, Horie S, Nakamura T. Factors affecting dynamic recrystallization of
metals and alloys. J Mater Sci Technol 1987;3:329–37.
[15] Niu JG, Zhang X, Zhang ZM, Li BC. Influence on the microstructure and
properties of AZ61 magnesium alloy at warm deformation. J Mater Process
Technol 2007;187(8):780–2.
[16] Lin YC, Chen MS, Zhong J. Effect of temperature and strain rate on the
compressive deformation behavior of 42CrMo steel. J Mater Process Technol
2008;205:308–15.
[17] Perdrix Ch. Caractéristiques D’écoulement plastique du métal dans les
conditions du TA,B À chaud. Commission des Communautés européennes
1982; p. 58–74 [7210-EA-311].
[18] Ryan ND, McQueen. Flow stress, dynamic restoration, strain hardening and
ductility in hot workability of 316 steel. J Mater Process Technol
1990;21:177–99.
[19] Jorge Jr AM, Balancin O. Prediction of steel flow stresses under hot working
conditions. Mater Res 2005;8:309–15.
[20] Jonas JJ, Sellars CM, Tegart WJMcG. Strength and structure under hot-working
conditions. Int Metall Rev 1969;14:1–24.
[21] Solhjoo S. Analysis of flow stress up to the peak at hot deformation. J Mater Des
2009;30:3036–40.
[22] Solhjoo S. Prediction of flow stress of AZ61 alloy at hot deformation
Unpublished work; 2008.
[23] Cho SH, Kim SI, Yoo YC. The effects of deformation variables on hot workability
of austenitic stainless steel. Met Mater Int 1998;4:732–6.
[24] Sellars CM, Tegart WJMcG. La relation entre la résistance et la structure dans la
deformation à chaud. Memor Scientif Rev Métallurg 1966;63:731–46.
[25] Medina SF, Hernandez CA. General expression of the Zener–Hollomon
parameter as a function of the chemical composition of low alloy and
microalloyed steels. Acta Mater 1996;44:137–48.
[26] Medina SF, Hernandez CA. The influence of chemical composition on peak
strain of deformed austenite in low alloy and microalloyed steels. Acta Mater
1996;44:149–54.
[27] Hernandez CA, Medina SF, Ruiz C. Modelling austenite flow curves in low alloy
and microalloyed steels. Acta Mater 1996;44:155–63.
[28] Medina SF, Hernandez CA. Modelling of the dynamic recrystallization
of austenite in low alloy and microalloyed steels. Acta Mater 1996;44:
165–71.
[29] Stewart GR, Jonas JJ, Montheillet F. Kinetics and critical conditions for the
initiation of dynamic recrystallization in 304 stainless steel. ISIJ Int
2004;44:1581–9.