Materials Technology

Effects of Solution Treatment and Test Temperature on Tensile Properties of

High Mn Austenitic Steels

Kriangyut Phiu-on1), Wolfgang Bleck1), Alexander Schwedt2), Joachim Mayer2)

1)
Department of Ferrous Metallurgy, RWTH Aachen University, Germany
2)
Central Facility for Electron Microscopy, RWTH Aachen University, Germany

Tensile properties of high Mn austenitic Fe-26.5Mn-3.6Al-2.2Si-0.38C-0.005B (HM1) and Fe-18.9Mn-0.62C-0.02Ti-0.005B (HM2, in

mass%) steels after different solution treatments have been investigated. The results show that the solution treatment has a significant
influence on microstructure and mechanical properties of the investigated steels. By appropriate solution treatment the product of tensile
strength (Rm) and total elongation (A50) of the hot rolled steel can be improved from ~ 40000-50000 MPa% to ~ 55000-65000 MPa%
depending on the steel chemical composition. A solution treatment with a very high temperature, e.g. at 1100 °C for the Fe-18.9Mn-0.62C-
0.02Ti-0.005B steel, results in a significant increase in the H-martensite fraction during quenching. This deteriorates the ductility of the steel.
A solution treatment at low temperature in the austenitic range, e.g. at 700 °C for the Fe-18.9Mn-0.62C-0.02Ti-0.005B steel, results in a
decrease in the grain size of the steel. This suppresses the H-martensite transformation during cooling. EBSD measurements revealed the
mechanisms contributing to the overall plasticity of the investigated steels on the microscale. The plasticity of the 26.5Mn-3.6Al-2.2Si-
0.38C-0.005B steel is produced mainly by TWIP mechanism under the examined experimental conditions, whereas for the Fe-18.9Mn-
0.62C-0.02Ti-0.005B steel TWIP and TRIP mechanisms occur with different degrees depending on the test temperature of the tensile test.

Keywords: high manganese austenitic steel, solution treatment, deformation twinning, TWIP, TRIP, serrated flow, Portevin-Le Chatelier
effect, EBSD

DOI: 10.2374/SRI08SP120; submitted on 26 June 2008, accepted on 11 July 2008

Introduction It is well-known that solution treatment (ST) has a

High manganese steels (HMS) composed of single phase
austenite or multi phases with a large volume fraction of
austenite can be divided according to the characteristic
phenomena occurring during plastic deformation into
transformation induced plasticity (TRIP) steels, twinning
induced plasticity (TWIP) steels and shear-band induced
plasticity (SIP) steels [1,2]. With the ability to alloy large
amounts of alloying elements in the austenite matrix, the
steels can exhibit a good combination of strength and
formability. The product of tensile strength and total
elongation of the steel is depending on the volume fraction
of retained austenite prior deformation. With increasing
the volume fraction of retained austenite the product
increases.
High Mn steels are expected to be attractive for
automotive applications. The request is [3]
- high strength: lightweight design by reduced sheet
thickness,
- high formability: drawing of complex geometries with
fewer deformation steps,
- high energy absorption: increased safety when used in
crash relevant components,
- cost reduction: replacement of cost intensive materials
(Al, Mg, stainless steel) or cost-intensive processes (hot
pressing).
Typical parts that are considered are longitudinal beam,
dashboard cowl, A- and B-pillar, roof rail, seat cross
member, and suspension dome [4].
significant influence on the carbide dissolution and
mechanical properties of as-cast high Mn-high C austenitic
steels such as Hadfield steels. However, the knowledge
about effects of solution treatment on mechanical
properties of newly developed high Mn-C steel strip
passed a high cooling rate after hot rolling has been
scarcely obtained. Therefore, an objective of this research
is to investigate the effects of solution treatment on the
mechanical properties of hot rolled high Mn-C austenitic
steels. In addition, the impact of the different deformation
mechanisms on tensile properties was investigated by
varying test temperature.
Experimental Procedure
Materials. Two high Mn steels with different stacking
fault energies and steel concepts have been investigated.
The first steel is based on Fe-Mn-Al-Si steels that have
been investigated in many papers, e.g. by Grässel et al. [1]
and by Kroos et al. [5]. Manganese is an austenite
stabiliser. The JoH transformation temperature decreases
with increasing Mn content. If its content in steel is less
than 15 mass%, an Dc martensite phase is formed which
deteriorates the formability [6]. Manganese has only a
small effect on solid solution strengthening in HMS but a
strong effect on the deformation mechanism.
Alloying aluminium into HMS increases the stacking
fault energy (SFE) of austenite, e.g. ~ 5 mJ/m2 per 1
mass%Al [7]. The formation of H-martensite can be

steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 1 29


Materials Technology
suppressed by Al addition. Alloying aluminium is very
effective for improving low temperature toughness of
HMS [8]. In addition, it has been reported that high Mn
austenitic steels alloyed with Al exhibit a good property in
aspect of resisting delay cracking, e.g. Fe-18Mn-1.5Al-
0.6C [9].
However, as the Al content in HMS increases, the
formation of strain-induced martensite and deformation
twinning become more difficult [10]. This affects the
mechanical properties of the steel, e.g. tensile strength,
work hardening and ductility. In addition, Al can segregate
on the grain boundaries during solidification, and produce
a low melting point intermetallic compound such as Fe2Al5
having a melting point of about 1170°C, which causes a
weakness in the casting structure. Adding small amounts
of boron, titanium or zirconium can improve the hot
ductility of the steels [11].
Silicon strengthens the austenite owing to the solid
solution hardening. It also takes effect by refining H-
martensite plates and increasing fracture strength [8]. With
an appropriate addition of carbon and boron into Fe-Mn-
Al-Si steels cracks and instabilities in the strip-edge region
are significantly reduced [12]. It was stated that boron
takes effect by reducing the average grain size in slabs.
Thus, the use of boron enables the workability of slabs to
be substantially improved with a consequent improvement
of plate surface quality [13].
The other steel is based on Fe-Mn-C steels that have
been investigated in many papers, e.g. by Allain et al. [14]
and TWIP steels (X-IP) by Cugy at el. [15]. Carbon is
well-known austenite stabiliser and effective solid solution
strengthening element.
The effects of alloying elements on properties of high
Mn steels are summarised in Table 1.
Processing. Ingots of high Mn steels were prepared in a
50 kg laboratory scale using an induction furnace with Ar
protective atmosphere. Chemical compositions of the
steels investigated by inductively coupled plasma optical
emission spectrometry and gas analysis are shown in
Table 2. In the rest of this paper, the investigated high Mn
steels will be called HM1 and HM2, respectively.
Table 1. Alloy concept of high Mn steels.
* for high Mn steels alloyed with Al
+: promoting/ increasing effect
- : reducing effect
solid solution
H-martensite
Element J stabiliser strengthening
refinement
hot ductility*
austenite
C + +
Mn +
Al
Si + +
B +
Ti
Table 2. Chemical compositions of the investigated steels.
Thickness Chemical composition (mass%)
Steel
(mm) C Mn Si Al Ti B N
HM1 1.8 0.38 26.5 2.2 3.6 <0.005 0.005
HM2 1.6 0.62 18.9 n.d. n.d. 0.020 0.005
30
1869344x, 2009, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2374/SRI08SP120 by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi, Wiley Online Library on [13/03/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
The cast ingots were cut into plates with a thickness of
about 19 mm. Hot rolling of the plates was carried out
after reheating the plates to 1200 °C under Ar atmosphere
and soaking at this temperature for 40 minutes. The plates
were hot rolled to sheets with a thickness of about 1.7 mm.
After hot rolling the rolled sheets were air cooled to room
temperature (Group 1 in Figure 1). Some hot rolled and
air cooled sheets (HR) were further heat treated using the
following parameters (Figure 1):
- solution treatment at 700, 900, 1000 or 1100°C for 30
min and then water quenching (Group 2)
- solution treatment at 1000°C for 5 min and then water
quenching (Group 3)
Thermodynamic calculations. The temperature ranges
with a large fraction of austenite phase of the investigated
steels were calculated using the “Thermo-Calc” software
with the TCFE5 database for steels/Fe-alloys. The
calculated results of the steels HM1 and HM2 are shown
in Figure 2 and Figure 3, respectively. Both steels have
no G/J transformation at high temperatures; a large fraction
of austenite phase is observed at high temperatures below
the liquidus temperature. The steel HM2 possesses a wider
temperature range of a large fraction of pure austenite
without precipitates than the steel HM1 does. The solution
treatment at 900-1100 qC for the steel HM1 and at 700-
1100 qC for the steel HM2 were selected according to the
J-range.
Stacking fault energies of the investigated steels were
calculated according to the thermochemical model by
Dumay et al. [7] with considering elements including Fe,
Mn, Al, Si and C. The calculated SFEs at -40qC, 23qC and
100qC are 35, 39 and 48 mJ/m2 for the steel HM1, and 8,
18 and 33 mJ/m2 for the steel HM2, respectively. By this,
it is expected that the steel HM1 possesses a higher
austenite stability compared with the steel HM2. By the
model from Dumay et al. the strain induced H-martensite
transformation occurs in HMS with SFEs below 18 mJ/m2,
and the onset of strain induced Dc-martensite trans-
formation corresponds to SFEs below 12 mJ/m2 [7].

Testing procedure. Tensile tests of the investigated
steels were performed by a Zwick/Z100 tensile testing
machine. Tensile specimens with a gauge length of 50 mm
(DIN EN 50114) were tested with a strain rate of 6.7 ˜ 10-4
s-1 at -40 °C, room temperature (23 qC) and 100 °C. A
JEOL JSM-7000F scanning electron microscope (SEM)
with electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) system
EDAX Pegasus was used to reveal the microstructure of
- the investigated steels.
Specimens for the microstructural investigation were
ground, mechanically polished with diamond pastes of 6
+ Pm and 1 Pm, respectively. The specimens were further
electropolished with the electrolyte A2 from Struers. The
electropolishing was carried out at the temperature range
of 3-6 oC by applying a voltage of 34 V for 15 seconds.
Grain sizes excluding twins of specimens prior
deformation were determined by EBSD. The phase
constituents of specimens prior deformation and the phase
0.0056 constituents of specimens at uniform elongation after
0.0056 fracture by tensile testing were analysed by EBSD.
steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 1
 1869344x, 2009, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2374/SRI08SP120 by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi, Wiley Online Library on [13/03/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Materials Technology

Results and Discussion Hot rolling

Effects of solution treatment time. Tensile properties Air cooling

at room temperature of the investigated steels after to RT
solution treatment at 1000 °C for different soaking times
are shown in Table 3. Both steels exhibit tensile strengths Group 1
above 700 MPa with total elongations above 50%. The 700, 900, 1000 1000°C/5min
solution treatments at 1000 °C improved total elongations or 1100°C/30min + quenching
(A50) of the hot rolled steel HM1 while there is no + quenching
considerable effect on A50 of the hot rolled steel HM2.
Group 2 Group 3
Both as-hot rolled steels exhibit quite good ductility.
Therefore, the solution treatment before cold rolling is
considered to be unnecessary. It can be observed that the
Figure 1. Conditions of heat treatment after hot rolling of the
yield stress of the investigated steels can be adjusted by investigated steels.
varying solution treatment time. With increasing solution
treatment time at 1000 °C the yield stress tends to decrease.
2 4 4
The investigated steels show different behaviour in the 1.0
1 – Mass fraction of AlN
stress-strain curves from tensile tests. The steel HM1 0.9 2 – Mass fraction of FCC
exhibits smooth stress-strain curves (Figure 4) while the 2 2 4 3 – Mass fraction of M2B

Mass fractions of phases

0.8
4 – Mass fraction of liquid
steel HM2 possesses higher tensile strengths with serrated 0.7 5 – Mass fraction of M5C2
stress-strain curves or Portevin-Le Chatelier effect, PLC 0.6 6 – Mass fraction of BCC
(Figure 5). It was reported that aluminium addition tends 0.5
to reduce the diffusivity of carbon in Fe-Mn-Al-C steels,
0.4
increases the activation energy for the onset of serrations,
0.3
and thereby moves the serrated flow to higher 6 4 2
temperatures than room temperature [16]. The cause of 0.2

smooth stress-strain curves of the investigated steel HM1 0.1 5

5 3 1 4 1 2 1
is attributed to be the effect of Al alloying. 0 31
600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Temperature (Celsius)
Effects of solution treatment temperature. Tensile J
properties at room temperature of the investigated steels
for different solution treatment temperatures are shown in
Table 4. For the solution treatment time of 30 minutes all Figure 2. Phase fraction-temperature diagram of the steel HM1.
The homogeneous J range is indicated.
solution treatment temperatures can be used to process the
investigated steels in order to achieve tensile strengths 2 2 2 4
over 700 MPa. Increasing solution treatment temperature 1.0
2 1 – Mass fraction of BN
increases the grain size and reduces the tensile strength of 0.9 2 – Mass fraction of FCC
3 – Mass fraction of gas
Mass fractions of phases

2 4
the solution treated steels. 0.8
4 – Mass fraction of liquid
From the result of microstructural investigation of the 0.7 5 – Mass fraction of cementite
steels prior deformation and the steels after tensile test, it 0.6

is observed that it is more difficult for the JoH 0.5

0.4
transformation to take place in the steel HM1 than in the
steel HM2. This means that the steel HM1 possesses 0.3

higher austenite stability than the steel HM2. Tensile 0.2 4 2

properties of the investigated steels after solution 0.1

5 1 1 1 43 2 3
treatments show an appreciable difference between them. 0 1
600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Temperature (Celsius)
J
Table 3. Solution treatments and mechanical properties of the
steels from group no, 1, 2 and 3 of Figure 1.
HR: hot rolled and air cooled. Figure 3. Phase fraction-temperature diagram of the steel HM2.
The homogeneous J range is indicated.
Rp0.2 Rm Au A50 Rm x A50
Heat treatment
(MPa) (MPa) (%) (%) (MPa%)
HM1 The higher austenite stability steel HM1 possesses a
HR 553 827 48 53 43831 smaller change in mechanical properties for different
HR+1000°C/5 min 519 838 50 55 46090
solution treatment temperatures compared with the lower
austenite stability steel HM2. Increasing solution treatment
HR+1000°C/30 min 366 769 63 66 50754
temperature increases the grain size, which reduces
HM2 austenite stability of the steel [17]. This is expected to be
HR 502 1040 50 54 56160 the cause of the detrimental effect on mechanical
HR+1000°C/5 min 369 1037 53 55 57035 properties of the lower J stability steel HM2 by a high-
HR+1000°C/30 min 341 961 53 53 50933 temperature solution treatment.

steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 1 31

 1869344x, 2009, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2374/SRI08SP120 by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi, Wiley Online Library on [13/03/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Materials Technology

1200 HR
1200

Engineering stress (MPa)

Engineering stress (MPa)

HR+1000 °C/5 min HR

HR+1000°C/5min
1000 HR+1000 °C/30 min 1000
HR+1000°C/30min

800 800

600 600

400 400

200 200
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Engineering strain Engineering strain

Figure 4. Engineering stress-engineering strain curves of the steel Figure 5. Engineering stress-engineering strain curves of the steel
HM1 for different solution treatment times. HM2 for different solution treatment times.

1200 1200
Hot rolled condition (HR)

Engineering stress (MPa)

Engineering stress (MPa)

HR+700 °C/30 min

1000 1000
Hot rolled condition (HR)
HR+900 °C/30 min
HR+900 °C/30 min
800 800 HR+1000 °C/30 min
HR+1100 °C/30 min

600 HR+1000 °C/30 min 600

HR+1100 °C/30 min

400 400

200 200
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

Engineering strain Engineering strain

Figure 6. Engineering stress-engineering strain curves of the steel Figure 7. Engineering stress-engineering strain curves of the steel
HM1 for different solution treatment temperatures. HM2 for different solution treatment temperatures .

1200 1200
-40 °C
Engineering stress (MPa)
Engineering stress (MPa)

-40 °C 23 °C
1000 100 °C
1000
23 °C
800 100 °C 800

600 600

400 400

200 200

0 0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Engineering strain Engineering strain

Figure 8. Engineering stress-engineering strain curves of the Figure 9. Engineering stress-engineering strain curves of the
HR+1000°C/30min solution treated steel HM1 for different test HR+1000°C/30min solution treated steel HM2 for different test
temperatures . temperatures

For the steel HM2 after solution treatment at 700 qC for [18] that with decreasing austenite grain size, especially
30 min and water quenching, the steel possesses an below ~30 Pm, the JoH transformation is restrained.
average grain size of 24 Pm and single phase J without H- For the steel HM2 after solution treatment at 1100°C
martensite. The single phase austenite after this solution and water quenching a considerable amount of H-
treatment differs from the mixed phases of austenite and H- martensite up to about 38 % is also observed besides the
martensite in other solution treated steels with larger grain austenite phase. The product of tensile strength and total
sizes. This corresponds to the analysis from Lee and Choi elongation of the steel for this solution treatment

32 steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 1

 1869344x, 2009, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2374/SRI08SP120 by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi, Wiley Online Library on [13/03/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Materials Technology

temperature is significantly lower than those of the steel

processed by using other solution treatment temperatures.
Stress-strain curves of the investigated steels for
different solution treatment temperatures are shown in
Figure 6 and Figure 7. It is observed that the yield stress
and tensile strength of the solution treated steels are lower
compared with those of the hot rolled steel without
solution treatment. The product of tensile strength and
total elongation of appropriate solution treated steel is
higher compared with that of the hot rolled steel without
solution treatment; which is mainly caused by an
improvement in ductility of the solution treated steels.

Effects of test temperature. Tensile tests of the

investigated steels after solution treatment at 1000 °C for
30 minutes were carried out also at -40 °C and 100 °C.
The result is shown in Table 5. The product of tensile
strength and total elongation of the steel HM2 is more
dependent on test temperature than that of the steel HM1.
Increasing test temperature improves the value of RmxA50
for the lower austenite stability steel HM2. A considerable
amount of strain-induced H+Dc-martensites (~ 53%) is
observed in the steel HM2 after tensile test at -40 °C. The
possible detriment of D'-martensite by the JoHoD'
mechanism on tensile properties of the steel will be
discussed in the part Microstructure.
Stress-strain curves of the 1000 °C/ 30 min solution
treated steels for different test temperatures are shown in
Figure 8 and Figure 9. The stress-strain curves of the
investigated steels deformed at -40 °C have no stress drop Figure 10. J inverse pole figure map of the HR+1000°C/30min
after reaching a maximum stress. For the steel HM2 solution treated steel HM1 prior deformation. The colour coding of
serrated stress-strain curve is obviously observed for the the unit triangle applies for all following J inverse pole figure maps
deformation at 100°C but it disappears for the deformation (scanned area: 154 x 444 ˜m; step size: 0.5 ˜m).
at -40 °C.

Microstructure. The phase constituents of selected
specimens prior deformation and the phase constituents of
selected specimens at uniform elongation after tensile test
were analysed by EBSD. Figure 10 shows an inverse pole
figure (IPF) map of austenite depicting the crystal axis
aligned with the sample normal direction (ND) of
HR+1000°C/30min solution treated steel HM1. This and
all following IPF maps are shown for points with
Confidence Index > 0.1, cf. [19]. The steel consists of
single phase austenite. Different orientations of austenite
grains can be observed. In addition, different orientations
of crystal lattices in an austenite grain with twin
boundaries can be observed.
Twin boundaries were determined by applying the
criteria as follows [20-23]:
- Misorientation between matrix and twin: a boundary
must have a misorientation or rotation angle near 60°
about the rotation axis <111> to be considered an fcc
twin.
- Plane matching: the (111) planes in the crystal lattices
on either side of the boundary plane must be aligned
with the boundary plane. In 2 D this means that the
traces must be aligned.
In Figure 10 annealing twin boundaries are marked
using the criteria with a misorientation of 60° about <111>
with an angular tolerance of 1°.

Table 4. Effects of solution treatment temperature on mechanical properties and microstructure of the steels from group no. 2 of Figure 1.

Solution treatment Grain size Crystal structure Crystal structure Rp0.2 Rm Au A50 Rm x A50
Steel
temperature (Pm) prior deformation after deformation (MPa) (MPa) (%) (%) (MPa%)
Inhomogeneous
900 °C J N.D. 365 775 62 67 51925
/ mixed sizes
HM1 1000 °C 32 366 769 63 66 50754
J J
1100 °C 121 J J 325 731 71 76 55556
700 °C 24 J J+H 397 1038 56 63 65394
900 °C n.d. n.d. N.D. 310 981 63 66 64746
HM2
1000 °C 43 J+H J+H 341 961 53 53 50933
1100 °C 56 J+H N.D. 291 822 39 40 32880

steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 1 33

 1869344x, 2009, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2374/SRI08SP120 by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi, Wiley Online Library on [13/03/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Materials Technology

The image quality and J IPF

maps of the HR+1000°C/30min
solution treated steel HM1 after
tensile test at room temperature are
shown in Figures 11a and 11-b,
respectively. The specimen consists
of single phase austenite. A lower
part of Figure 11b marked as area 1
shows an austenite grain consisting
of a deformed matrix with crystal
axes varying around <111> being
aligned with the sample ND
(colours varying between turquoise,
violet and blue) and deformation
bands of different orientation
(rather <001> || ND, colours
varying between red, orange and
pink). Figure 11c shows the image
quality map of the steel with marks
of twin boundaries by the criteria
(a) (b) (c) mentioned in Figure 10. However,
since the deformation might have
Figure 11. EBSD analysis of the HR+1000°C/30min solution treated steel HM1 after tensile
test at room temperature (scanned area: 29 x 65 ˜m; step size: 0.1 ˜m). (a) Image quality
continued after twinning, the set
map. (b) Inverse pole figure map of J. (c) Image quality map with marks of twin boundaries. tolerance has been increased to 5°.
The fact that the boundaries
fulfilling the criteria concur with
the deformation bands indicates
that deformation twinning is the
prominent deformation mechanism
for this specimen.
Figure 12 shows the EBSD
analysis of the HR+1000°C/30min
solution treated steel HM2. Almost
single phase austenite with a few
parallel plates of the thermally
triggered H-martensite (<1 %) are
observed. It indicates that the
martensitic transformation starting
temperature Ms is higher than room
temperature. By considering
austenite stability this steel is less
stable compared with the steel
HM1 that consists of single phase
austenite.
Figure 13 shows the EBSD
analysis of the HR+1000°C/30min
solution treated steel HM2. The
specimen was taken from the
uniform elongated part after tensile
test at room temperature. Figure
13a shows the image quality map
with marks of twin boundaries of
the steel. The adjusted criterion
with a 60° misorientation about
<111> together with an angle
tolerance of 5° (cf. above), and
(111) planes at twin boundaries
(a) (b) (c)
were used in order to clearly
Figure 12. EBSD analysis of the HR+1000°C/30min solution treated steel HM2 prior observe deformation twin
deformation. The colour coding of the hexagonal unit triangle applies for all following H boundaries (marked as yellow).
inverse pole figure maps (scanned area 146.5 x 431 ˜m; step size: 0.5 ˜m). (a) Image
quality map. (b) Inverse pole figure map of J. (c) Inverse pole figure map of H ( H | 0.4% of Figure 13c shows an increase in H-
points with confidence index > 0.1). martensite fraction in this deformed

34 steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 1

 1869344x, 2009, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2374/SRI08SP120 by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi, Wiley Online Library on [13/03/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Materials Technology

specimen compared with the

specimen prior deformation (Figure
12), which is partly due to
statistical effects as consequence of
the reduction of the scan area.
However, also in scans of a scan
area comparable to Figure 12, a
higher fraction of H-martensite
(2.3% of points indexed with a
confidence index greater than 0.1)
was detected. This indicates that a
little transformation induced
plasticity (TRIP) took place.
From the results in Figures 12
and 13 it can be concluded that
both TRIP and TWIP mechanisms
took place in this specimen.
Figure 14 shows the IPF map of
J of the HR+1100°C/30min
solution treated steel HM1. The
misorientation of crystal lattices
across annealing twin bands was
measured and found to be close to (a) (b) (c)
60°; that is the ideal misorientation
Figure 13. EBSD analysis of the HR+1000°C/30min solution treated steel HM2 after tensile
between matrix and twin. test at room temperature (scanned area: 31 x855 ˜m; step size: 0.07 ˜m). (a) Image quality
Annealing twin bands with a width map with marks on twin boundaries. (b) Inverse pole figure map of J. (c) Inverse pole figure
of about a few microns to some ten map of H ( H | 6.1% of points with confidence index > 0.1).
microns can be observed.
Figure 15 shows the EBSD
analysis of HR+700°C/ 30min
solution treated steel HM2. The
boundaries were marked by using
different criteria. At least two types
of grain morphology can be
observed: the first one is rather
small grains with marks of twin
boundaries inside, and the other
one is rather large grains with high
densities of crystal misorientation
in the range between 1° and 5°
inside that are marked as red traces.
Figure 16 shows the IPF map of
J of the HR+700°C/30min solution
treated steel HM2 after tensile test.
It can be observed that the mis-
orientation of crystal lattices across Figure 14. Misorientation of crystal lattices across annealing twin bands (along the line A-B)
of the HR+1100°C/30min solution treated steel HM1 prior deformation (scanned area: 364 x
deformation twins is close to 60°. 1150 ˜m; step size: 2 ˜m).
Deformation twins with a width of
less than 1 Pm can be observed.
Figure 17 shows the EBSD analysis of the HR+1100°C/ Table 5. Effects of test temperature on mechanical
30min solution treated steel HM2. A significant amount of properties of the steels from group no. 2 of Figure 1.
H-martensite (about 38% of the analysed area) is observed
after the high-temperature solution treatment. The
Test Temp. Rp0.2 Rm Au A50 Rm x A50
enhancement of JoH transformation by high-temperature Steel
[°C] (MPa) (MPa) (%) (%) (MPa%)
annealing was also observed by Jang et al. [24]. The - 40 553 827 48 53 43831
authors attributed that the increased driving force for the
HM1 23 519 838 50 55 46090
JoH transformation by solution treatment at high tem-
peratures may result from dissolving complex dislocations 100 366 769 63 66 50754
like dislocation tangles and networks, which were - 40 502 1040 50 54 56160
inherited from the prior rolling. Fewer obstacles exist in HM2 23 369 1037 53 55 57035
the structure to hinder the motion of Shockley partials, 100 341 961 53 53 50933

steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 1 35

 1869344x, 2009, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2374/SRI08SP120 by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi, Wiley Online Library on [13/03/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Materials Technology

The area in the white parabola

reveals an initial austenite grain.
Within this area the austenite
(marked as light-green) can be
observed as thin bands after a large
fraction was transformed induced
by strain into H-martensite (yellow
areas). It is also observed that a
further transformation into D'-
martensite took place within the H-
martensite only. Therefore, the
deformation mechanism in this con-
dition should be the double mar-
tensite transformation (JoHoD');
the H-martensite is formed as an
inter-mediate stage in the JoHoD'
transformation.
Considering the tensile properties
of this steel by tensile test at -40°C,
a relative low ductility with a total
elongation of 32% is obtained. A
considerable amount of D'-
martensite (~ 12% of the analysed
area) is observed within H-
Figure 15. EBSD analysis of the HR+700°C/30min solution treated steel HM2 prior
martensite plates. The strain
deformation (scanned area: 131 x 355 ˜m; step size: 0.4 ˜m). induced JoHoD' transformation
was also found to be detrimental to
the formability compared with the
strain induced JoH transformation
for Fe-Mn steels [27], Fe-Mn-Al-C
steels [6,11], Fe-Mn-Cr stainless
steels [28] and Fe-Cr-Ni stainless
steel AISI 304 [29]. Increasing Mn
content of the Fe-Mn-Al-C steels
[6,11], and increasing Cr and N
contents of the Fe-Mn-Cr stainless
steels [29] can suppress the double
martensitic transformation.
In general, EBSD measurements
with a field emission gun scanning
electron microscope (FEG-SEM)
can achieve resolutions down to
some 10 nm. Therefore, in the case
of our measurements here, the
resolution is rather determined by
Figure 16. Misorientation of crystal lattices across deformation twins (along the line A-B) of the step size of the measurement,
the HR+700°C/30min solution treated steel HM2 after tensile test (scanned area: 37 x 68 which was chosen in order to
˜m; step size: 0.1 ˜m). measure sufficiently large areas in
reasonable time. Additionally, in
enhancing the JoH transformation. Besides that, the large the deformed samples small structures might have been
grain size of austenite rises the Ms temperature of JoH missed, if the pattern quality (corresponding to the local
transformation [17,25]. crystallinity) was too bad, due to our restriction to a
Confidence Index larger than 0.1.
Figure 18 shows the phase map of the HR+1000°C/
30min solution treated steel HM2 after tensile test at -40°C.
At this low test temperature the fraction of H-martensite Conclusions
increased after tensile test. In addition, D'-martensite can
be observed (The difference in the crystal structure The investigated high Mn steels exhibit a good
between D-ferrite and D'-martensite is too small to be combination of tensile strength and ductility. Tensile
measured directly with EBSD [26], therefore the phase strengths (Rm) between 700-1050 MPa and total
was indexed with D-iron). elongations (A50) of 50-75% can be achieved. A solution

36 steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 1

 1869344x, 2009, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2374/SRI08SP120 by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi, Wiley Online Library on [13/03/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
Materials Technology

treatment can improve the product

of tensile strength and total
elongation of the HR steel, mainly
caused by an improvement in
ductility. We assume that this is
due to the adjustment of grain size
and the improvement in the
distribution of alloying elements,
e.g. carbon.
The steel HM2 possesses a wider
temperature range of a large
fraction of pure austenite without
precipitates than the steel HM1
does. A solution treatment with a
very high temperature results in a
significant increase in the H-
martensite fraction during quench-
ing. This deteriorates the ductility
of the steel. A solution treatment
with a quite low temperature in the
austenitic range results in a
decrease in the grain size of the
steel and also inhomogeneous
microstructure with mixed grain
Figure 17. EBSD analysis of the HR+1100°C/30min solution treated steel HM2 prior
sizes.
deformation (scanned area: 161 x 485 ˜m; step size: 0.3 ˜m). Left: Image quality map.
Serrated stress-strain curves by Right: Phase map.
tensile tests are found in the steel
HM2 for a particular temperature
range, while they do not appear in
the steel HM1. Decreasing test
temperature to -40 qC suppresses
serrated flow of the steel HM2.
Therefore, serrated flow depends
on the chemical composition, e.g.
Al content, and test temperature.
EBSD measurements revealed
the mechanisms contributing to the
overall plasticity of the investigated
steels on the microscale. The
plasticity of the steel HM1 is
controlled mainly by TWIP
mechanism, whereas for the steel
HM2, TWIP and TRIP mechanisms
concurrently occur.
Varying initial grain size prior
deformation does not change the
prominent deformation mechanism
during tensile test at RT, but it has
a significant influence on the
mechanical properties. Varying test Figure 18. Phase map of the HR+1000°C/30min solution treated steel HM2 after tensile
temperature has a significant test at -40 °C (scanned area: 39.6 x 91 ˜m; step size: 0.1 ˜m).
influence in changing deformation
mechanism, e.g. the prominent
deformation mechanism of steel HM2 changes from TWIP Acknowledgement
at RT to TRIP at -40 qC.
The general conclusion for optimum cold formability is The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial
that the microstructure should consist of a large fraction of support of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)
within the Collaborative Research Centre (SFB) 761
austenite or single phase austenite prior deformation. The
“Stahl - ab initio. Quantenmechanisch geführtes Design
strain induced JoHoDc martensitic transformation should neuer Eisenbasis-Werkstoffe”. We are also indebted to R.
be avoided if high formability is required. Gier for the preparation of the EBSD specimens.

steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 1 37


Materials Technology
References
[1] O. Grässel, L. Krüger, G. Frommeyer, L.W. Meyer: Int. J. Plasticity,
16 (2000), 1391-1409.
[2] G. Frommeyer, U. Brüx, Steel Research Int., 77 (2006), No. 9-10,
627-633.
[3] H. Hofmann, S. Göklü, J. Gerlach, U. Bruex: Properties of light
steels with induced plasticity (L-IP“ steels), IDDRG, Int. Deep
Drawing Research Group 2004 Conference, Sindelfingen Germany,
May 24-26, 2004, pp. 270-279.
[4] M. Kuntz: Verformungsmechanismen hoch manganlegierter
austenitischer TWIP-Stähle, ISBN 3899596919, Der Andere Verlag;
1st ed., January 2008, pp. 97-100.
[5] J. Kroos, K.-H. Spitzer, G. Frommeyer, V. Flaxa, U. Brüx, K.
Brockmeier.: Method for the generation of hot strips of light gauge
steel, Patent, 2005, No. WO/2005/061152 A1.
[6] T.W. Kim, J.K. Han, R.W. Chang, Y.G. Kim: Manufacturing process
for austenitic high manganese steel having superior formability,
strengths and weldability, US Patent, 1995, No. 5431753.
[7] A. Dumay, J.-P. Chateau, S. Allain, S. Migot, O. Bouaziz: Mater. Sci.
Eng. A (2007), doi:10.1016/j.msea.2006.12.170
[8] S. Takaki, T. Furuya, Y. Tokunaga: ISIJ Int., 30 (1990), No. 8, 636-
637.
[9] S.K. Kim, J.W. Cho, W.J. Kwak, G. Kim, O. Kwon: Development of
TWIP Steel for Automotive Application, METEC InSteelCon 2007,
Proceedings 3rd Int. Conf. on New Developments in Metallurgical
Process Technologies, June 11-15, 2007, Düsseldorf, Germany, pp.
690-697.
[10] F.C. Chen, C.P. Chou: Mater. Sci. Eng., A160 (1993), 261-270.
38
1869344x, 2009, 1, Downloaded from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2374/SRI08SP120 by Orta Dogu Teknik Universitesi, Wiley Online Library on [13/03/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
[11] T.W. Kim, Y.G. Kim, S.H. Park: “Process for manufacturing high
manganese hot rolled steel sheet without any crack”, US Patent,
1997, No. 5647922.
[12] H. Hoffmann, B. Engl, M. Menne, T. Heller, W. Zimmermann:
“Highly stable, strips or steel sheets cold-formed, method for the
production of steel strips and uses of said steel”, US Patent, 2003, No.
US 2003/0145911 A1.
[13] A. Khorosh, S.I. Bulat, M.A. Mukhina, N.A. Sorokina, K.A.
Yushohenko: Steel in the USSR, December (1976), 677-678.
[14] S. Allain, J-P. Chateau, O. Bouaziz, S. Migot, N. Guelton : Mater.
Sci. Eng. A., 387-389 (2004), 158-162.
[15] P. Cugy, A. Hildenbrand, M. Bouzekri, D. Cornette, S. Göklü, H.
Hofmann: “A super-high strength Fe-Mn-C austenitic steel with
excellent formability for automobile applications”, Proc. Int. Conf.
Super-High Strength Steels, AIM&CSM, Rome, November 2-5,
2005.
[16] T. Shun, C.M. Wan, J.G. Byrne : Acta Metall. Mater., 40 (1992), No.
12, 3407-3412.
[17] S. Takaki, H. Nakatsu, Y. Tokunaga: Mater. Trans., JIM, 34 (1993),
No. 6, 489-495.
[18] Y.K. Lee, C.S. Choi: Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 31 (2000), No. 2, 355-
360.
[19] D. P. Field: Ultramicroscopy, 67 (1997), 1-9.
[20] Advanced Twin Boundaries Determination,
http://www.edax.com/Snippet.cfm?Snippet_ID=1344, Nov. 21, 2007.
[21] C. Blochwitz, W. Tirschler: Cryst. Res. Technol., 40 (2005), No. 1/2,
32-41.
[22] M. El Wahabi, L. Gavard, J.M. Cabrera, J.M. Prado, F. Montheillet:
Mater. Sci. Eng. A 393 (2005), No. 1-2, 83-90.
steel research int. 80 (2009) No. 1