Author Contributions
Conceptualization, J.J. and L.T.; methodology, L.T.; validation, L.T., formal analysis, L.T.; investigation, J.J. and L.T.; writing—original draft preparation, J.J.; writing—review and editing, J.J. and L.T.; visualization, L.T.; supervision, L.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Data Availability Statement
All data has been kept in the National Institute of Applied Science (INSA) of Rouen by one of the authors (J.J.).
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Taleb, L.; Sidoroff, F. A micromechanical modeling of the Greenwood–Johnson mechanism in transformation induced plasticity. Int. J. Plast. 2003, 19, 1821–1842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taleb, L.; Petit, S. New investigations on transformation induced plasticity and its interaction with classical plasticity. Int. J. Plast. 2006, 22, 110–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tahimi, A.; Taleb, L.; Barbe, F. Plasticité induite par transformation de phase martensitique dans l’acier 35NCD16. In Congrès Français de Mécanique; AFM: Courbevoie, France, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Taleb, L.; Cavallo, N.; Waeckel, F. Experimental analysis of transformation plasticity. Int. J. Plast. 2001, 17, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boudiaf, A.; Taleb, L.; Belouchrani, M.A. Experimental analysis of the correlation between martensitic transformation plasticity and the austenitic grain size in steels. Eur. J. Mech.-A/Solids 2011, 30, 326–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greenwood, G.W.; Johnson, R.H. The Deformation of Metals Under Small Stresses During Phase Transformations. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Math. Phys. Sci. 1965, 283, 403–422. [Google Scholar]
- Magee, C.L.; Paxton, H. Transformation Kinetics, Microplasticity and Aging of Martensite in FE-31 NI. 1966. Available online: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/transformation-kinetics%2C-microplasticity-and-aging-magee-paxton/12b33aea3be1e3e5ad16656b4a40c2986a3156c4 (accessed on 7 September 2021).
- Otsuka, T.; Satani, D.; Yamamoto, K.; Okamura, K.; Brenner, R.; Bacroix, B. Microstructure and heat treatment effect on transformation strain in steels: Part1 experiment. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2018, 35, 181–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Otsuka, T.; Satani, D.; Yamamoto, K.; Okamura, K.; Brenner, R.; Bacroix, B. Microstructure and heat treatment effect on transformation strain in steels: Part 2 modelling. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2018, 35, 187–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simsir, C. Transformation Induced Plasticity (TRIP) of SAE 52100 Steel during Martensitic and Bainitic Transformations. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321059412_Transformation_Induced_Plasticity_TRIP_of_SAE_52100_Steel_during_Martensitic_and_Bainitic_Transformations (accessed on 12 November 2021).
- Nagayama, K.; Kitajima, Y.; Kigami, S.; Tanaka, K.; Fischer, F.; Cailletaud, G. Transformation Induced Plasticity in Maraging Steel: An Experimental Study. Key Eng. Mater. 2000, 177, 443–448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nagayama, K.; Terasaki, T.; Tanaka, K.; Fischer, F.D.; Antretter, T.; Cailletaud, G.; Azzouz, F. Mechanical properties of a Cr–Ni–Mo–Al–Ti maraging steel in the process of martensitic transformation. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2001, 308, 25–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nagayama, K.; Terasaki, T.; Goto, S.; Tanaka, K.; Antretter, T.; Fischer, F.D.; Cailletaud, G.; Azzouz, F. Back stress evolution and iso-volume fraction lines in a Cr–Ni–Mo–Al–Ti maraging steel in the process of martensitic transformation. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2002, 336, 30–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zuo, X.; Liu, Y.; Chen, N.; Rong, Y. The process design of water quenching based on finite element simulation and its applications. Heat Treat. Surf. Eng. 2020, 2, 9–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leblond, J.B.; Devaux, J.; Devaux, J.C. Mathematical modelling of transformation plasticity in steels I: Case of ideal-plastic phases. Int. J. Plast. 1989, 5, 551–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taleb, L. Transformation-Induced Plasticity (TRIP). In Encyclopedia of Thermal Stresses; Hetnarski, R.B., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2014; pp. 6153–6163. ISBN 978-94-007-2739-7. [Google Scholar]
- Coret, M.; Calloch, S.; Combescure, A. Experimental study of the phase transformation plasticity of 16MND5 low carbon steel under multiaxial loading. Int. J. Plast. 2002, 18, 1707–1727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Videau, J.-C.; Cailletaud, G.; Pineau, A. Experimental Study of the Transformation-Induced Plasticity in a Cr-Ni-Mo-Al-Ti Steel. J. Phys. IV 1996, 6, C1-465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1.
Simplified look of the loading vs. time plot of the first series of tests.
Figure 2.
Experimental device used in the present study.
Figure 3.
Dimensions (in mm) of 35NCD16 test specimen.
Figure 4.
(a) Application of the loading–unloading cycle; (b) stress–strain diagram result of the loading–unloading cycle.
Figure 5.
Free Dilatometric test results: FD_1 is carried out using virgin specimen while FD_2 is obtained using the same specimen subjected to TRIP cycle in addition to FD_1.
Figure 6.
Free Dilatometric test results post TRIP tests.
Figure 7.
(a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between , and ; (b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between , , and .
Figure 8.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 3; (
b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 9.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 4; (
b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 10.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 5; (
b) TRIP strain v.stemperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 11.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 6; (
b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 12.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 7; (
b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 13.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 8; (
b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 14.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 9; (
b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 15.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 10; (
b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 16.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 11; (
b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 17.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 12; (
b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 18.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 13; (
b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 19.
(
a) Complete thermomechanical cycle comparison between
and
defined in
Table 14; (
b) TRIP strain vs. temperature comparison between
and
.
Figure 20.
The orange line represents the evolution of the ratio vs. Z during TRIP with 75% of the austenitic phase yield stress during the transformation. The grey line represents the prediction using Leblond’s model. The blue line represents the prediction using Desalos’ model.
Figure 21.
Final TRIP vs. applied stress. In the first case, only the reference TRIP results (found in
Section 3.1) are considered. In the second case, for each stress level, the average value is considered.
Table 1.
Different histories applied in the present work.
Memory after light thermomechanical history composed of one TRIP test |
VS | FD | | FD | | | | | | | |
VS | FD | | FD | | | | | | | |
VS | FD | | FD | | | | | | | |
Memory after medium thermomechanical history composed of 3 TRIP tests |
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | |
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | |
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | |
Memory after medium thermomechanical history composed of 2 TRIP tests |
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | | | |
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | | | |
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | | | |
Memory after severe thermomechanical history in classical elastoplasticity |
VS | FD | | FD | Elastoplastic cycle (see Figure 4) | | | FD | | | |
VS | FD | | FD | Elastoplastic cycle (see Figure 4) | | | FD | | | |
VS | FD | | FD | Elastoplastic cycle (see Figure 4) | | | FD | | | |
Table 2.
Chemical composition of the 35NCD16 steel used in the present study.
Element | C | Ni | Cr | Mo | Mn | Si | P | S | Fe |
---|
Weight [%] | 0.34 | 3.67 | 1.54 | 0.31 | 0.35 | 0.26 | <0.008 | <0.006 | Balance |
Table 3.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
---|
VS (Virgin specimen) | FD | | FD | |
Table 4.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
---|
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | |
Table 5.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
---|
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | |
Table 6.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|
VS | FD | | FD | Elastoplastic cycle (see Figure 4) | FD | |
Table 7.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
---|
VS | FD | | FD | |
Table 8.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
---|
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | |
Table 9.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
---|
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | |
Table 10.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|
VS | FD | | FD | Elastoplastic cycle (see Figure 4) | FD | |
Table 11.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
---|
VS | FD | | FD | |
Table 12.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
---|
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | |
Table 13.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
---|
VS | FD | | FD | | FD | | FD | |
Table 14.
Thermomechanical history applied before the test that will be compared to .
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 |
---|
VS | FD | | FD | Elastoplastic cycle (see Figure 4) | FD | |
| Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).