Advertisement

Effect of machining processes on the residual stress distribution heterogeneities and their consequences on the stress corrosion cracking resistance of AISI 316L SS in chloride medium

  • Amir Ben RhoumaEmail author
  • N. Sidhom
  • K. Makhlouf
  • H. Sidhom
  • C. Braham
  • G. Gonzalez
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • 109 Downloads

Abstract

The effects of machining such as grinding and turning on the microstructural and mechanical changes of the machined surfaces of AISI 316L stainless steel (SS) have been studied. Surface aspects and surface defects have been examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Machining-induced nanocrystallization has been investigated by transmission electron microscopy (TEM). Surface and subsurface residual stress distribution and plastic deformation induced by the machining processes have been assessed by X-ray diffraction (XRD) and micro-hardness measurements, respectively. The susceptibility to stress corrosion cracking (SCC) has been assessed by SEM examination of micro-crack networks which are characteristics of a machined surface immersed in boiling (140 ± 2 °C) solution of MgCl2 (40%) during a 48 h-period. The machined surface properties have been correlated to severe plastic deformation (SPD) resulting from specific cutting state of each process. High cutting temperature and plastic rate are considered to be at the origin of near-surface austenitic grain refinement that leads to equiaxed nanograins with a size ranging from 50 to 200 nm. Ground surface residual stress distribution heterogeneities at the micrometric scale are attributed to the random distribution of the density and the geometry of abrasive grains that represent micro-cutting tools in the grinding process. The relationship between residual stress distribution and susceptibility of the AISI 316L SS to SCC has been demonstrated, and an experimental criterion for crack initiation has been established.

Keywords

Stainless steel Machining Residual stress Nanostructure Chloride medium Crack network Stress corrosion cracking threshold 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Kumar PS, Acharyya SG, Rao SVR, Kapoor K (2017) Distinguishing effect of buffing vs. grinding, milling and turning operations on the chloride induced SCC susceptibility of 304L austenitic stainless steel. Mater Sci Eng A 687:193–199.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2017.01.079 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ben Fredj N, Sidhom H, Braham C (2006) Ground surface improvement of the austenitic stainless steel AISI 304 using cryogenic cooling. Surf Coat Technol 200(16):4846–4860.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2005.04.050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gürbüz H, Şeker U, Kafkas F (2017) Investigation of effects of cutting insert rake face forms on surface integrity. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 90(9):3507–3522.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9652-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ma Y, Zhang J, Feng P, Yu D, Xu C (2018) Study on the evolution of residual stress in successive machining process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 96(1):1025–1034.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-1542-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ben Rhouma A, Braham C, Fitzpatrick ME, Lédion J, Sidhom H (2001) Effects of surface preparation on pitting resistance, residual stress, and stress corrosion cracking in austenitic stainless steels. J Mater Eng Perform 10(5):507–514CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Braham C, Ben Rhouma A, Lédion J, Sidhom H (2005) Effect of machining conditions on residual stress corrosion cracking of 316L SS. Mater Sci Forum 490-491:305–310.  https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/MSF.490-491.305 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nabil BF, Ben Nasr M, Ben Rhouma A, Sidhom H, Braham C (2004) Fatigue life improvements of the AISI 304 stainless steel ground surfaces by wire brushing. J Mater Eng Perform 13.  https://doi.org/10.1361/15477020420819 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lyon KN, Marrow TJ, Lyon SB (2015) Influence of milling on the development of stress corrosion cracks in austenitic stainless steel. J Mater Process Technol 218:32–37.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.11.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ben Fredj N, Sidhom H (2006) Effects of the cryogenic cooling on the fatigue strength of the AISI 304 stainless steel ground components. Cryogenics 46(6):439–448.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cryogenics.2006.01.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chang L, Burke MG, Scenini F (2018) Stress corrosion crack initiation in machined type 316L austenitic stainless steel in simulated pressurized water reactor primary water. Corros Sci 138:54–65.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2018.04.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Seifert HP, Ritter S (2016) The influence of ppb levels of chloride impurities on the strain-induced corrosion cracking and corrosion fatigue crack growth behavior of low-alloy steels under simulated boiling water reactor conditions. Corros Sci 108:148–159.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2016.03.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhang W, Fang K, Hu Y, Wang S, Wang X (2016) Effect of machining-induced surface residual stress on initiation of stress corrosion cracking in 316 austenitic stainless steel. Corros Sci 108:173–184.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2016.03.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nishimura R, Maeda Y (2004) Metal dissolution and maximum stress during SCC process of ferritic (type 430) and austenitic (type 304 and type 316) stainless steels in acidic chloride solutions under constant applied stress. Corros Sci 46(3):755–768.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2003.07.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nishimura R (2007) Characterization and perspective of stress corrosion cracking of austenitic stainless steels (type 304 and type 316) in acid solutions using constant load method. Corros Sci 49(1):81–91.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2006.05.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Beavers JA, Johnson JT, Sutherby RL (2000) Materials factors influencing the initiation of near-neutral pH SCC on underground pipelines. (40252):V002T006A041.  https://doi.org/10.1115/ipc2000-221
  16. 16.
    Marteau J, Bouvier S (2016) Characterization of the microstructure evolution and subsurface hardness of graded stainless steel produced by different mechanical or thermochemical surface treatments. Surf Coat Technol 296:136–148.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2016.04.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yan L, Yang W, Jin H, Wang Z (2012) Analytical modelling of microstructure changes in the machining of 304 stainless steel. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 58(1):45–55.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-011-3384-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cao Y, Ni S, Liao X, Song M, Zhu Y (2018) Structural evolutions of metallic materials processed by severe plastic deformation. Mater Sci Eng R Rep 133:1–59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mser.2018.06.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Xu X, Zhang J, Liu H, He Y, Zhao W (2019) Grain refinement mechanism under high strain-rate deformation in machined surface during high speed machining Ti6Al4V. Mater Sci Eng A 752:167–179.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2019.03.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Atmani Z, Haddag B, Nouari M, Zenasni M (2016) Combined microstructure-based flow stress and grain size evolution models for multi-physics modelling of metal machining. Int J Mech Sci 118:77–90.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2016.09.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Turnbull A, Mingard K, Lord JD, Roebuck B, Tice DR, Mottershead KJ, Fairweather ND, Bradbury AK (2011) Sensitivity of stress corrosion cracking of stainless steel to surface machining and grinding procedure. Corros Sci 53(10):3398–3415.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.corsci.2011.06.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Maranhão C, Paulo Davim J (2010) Finite element modelling of machining of AISI 316 steel: numerical simulation and experimental validation. Simul Model Pract Theory 18(2):139–156.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2009.10.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Martin M, Weber S, Izawa C, Wagner S, Pundt A, Theisen W (2011) Influence of machining-induced martensite on hydrogen-assisted fracture of AISI type 304 austenitic stainless steel. Int J Hydrog Energy 36(17):11195–11206.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.05.133 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zhou N, Peng R, Pettersson R (2017) Surface characterization of austenitic stainless steel 304L after different grinding operations. Int J Mech Mater Eng 12.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s40712-017-0074-6
  25. 25.
    Zhou N, Pettersson R, Lin Peng R, Schönning M (2016) Effect of surface grinding on chloride induced SCC of 304L. Mater Sci Eng A 658:50–59.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2016.01.078 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Agrawal S, Joshi SS (2013) Analytical modelling of residual stresses in orthogonal machining of AISI4340 steel. J Manuf Process 15(1):167–179.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2012.11.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Capello E (2005) Residual stresses in turning: Part I: Influence of process parameters. J Mater Process Technol 160(2):221–228.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.06.012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zhou N, Peng RL, Pettersson R (2016) Surface integrity of 2304 duplex stainless steel after different grinding operations. J Mater Process Technol 229:294–304.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2015.09.031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Liu CR, Yang X (2001) The scatter of surface residual stresses produced by face-turning and grinding. Mach Sci Technol 5(1):1–21.  https://doi.org/10.1081/mst-100103175 MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chomienne V, Valiorgue F, Rech J, Verdu C (2016) Influence of part’s stiffness on surface integrity induced by a Finish turning operation of a 15-5PH stainless steel. Procedia CIRP 45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2016.02.331 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Liu M, Takagi J-i, Tsukuda A (2004) Effect of tool nose radius and tool wear on residual stress distribution in hard turning of bearing steel. J Mater Process Technol 150(3):234–241.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.02.038 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Martell J, Richard Liu C, Shi J (2014) Experimental investigation on variation of machined residual stresses by turning and grinding of hardened AISI 1053 steel. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 74.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-014-6089-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Richard Liu C, Yang X (2007) The scatter of surface residual stresses produced by face-turning and grinding. Mach Sci Technol 5:1.  https://doi.org/10.1081/mst-100103175 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Smithey DW, Kapoor SG, DeVor RE (2000) A worn tool force model for three-dimensional cutting operations. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 40(13):1929–1950.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0890-6955(00)00017-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ding W, Zhang L, Li Z, Zhu Y, Su H, Xu J (2016) Review on grinding-induced residual stresses in metallic materials. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 88.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-8998-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Karlsen W, Diego G, Devrient B (2010) Localized deformation as a key precursor to initiation of intergranular stress corrosion cracking of austenitic stainless steels employed in nuclear power plants. J Nucl Mater 406(1):138–151.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnucmat.2010.01.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amir Ben Rhouma
    • 1
    Email author
  • N. Sidhom
    • 1
  • K. Makhlouf
    • 2
  • H. Sidhom
    • 1
  • C. Braham
    • 3
  • G. Gonzalez
    • 4
  1. 1.Laboratoire de Mécanique, Matériaux et Procédés (LR99ES05), ENSITUniversité de TunisTunisTunisia
  2. 2.Preparatory Insitute for Engineering Studies of Nabeul, LR18ES45University of CarthageNabeulTunisia
  3. 3.Laboratoire Procédés et Ingénierie en Mécanique et Matériaux (PIMM, CNRS UMR 8006), ENSAMParisFrance
  4. 4.Instituto de Investigaciones en MaterialesMexicoMexico

Personalised recommendations