Advertisement

Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 54, Issue 13, pp 9824–9842 | Cite as

Experimental and numerical investigation of interfacial microstructure in fully age-hardened 15-5 PH stainless steel during impact welding

  • Bert C. LiuEmail author
  • Anthony N. Palazotto
  • Ali Nassiri
  • Anupam Vivek
  • Glenn S. Daehn
Metals
  • 61 Downloads

Abstract

This work explores high-speed impact of fully age-hardened 15-5 PH stainless steel with itself at average impact speed of 682 m/s and impact angles ranging from 8° to 28°. It was assumed that higher angles corresponded with higher shear stresses at impact point. Microstructural examination indicated more pronounced shear-induced features at higher angles, such as nanoscale elongated grains and adiabatic shear bands. Interfacial waves, a feature associated with impact welding, were most prominent at 12° and 16°. White etching layers (WELs), a constituent formed by rapid heating and cooling at impact, were found along the impact interface and most prominently at the front and back vortices of the interfacial waves. WELs (along the interface) were softer than base materials due to overaging, whereas materials surrounding the interface were harder than base materials due to grain refinement. Numerical simulations based on smoothed particle hydrodynamics method were employed to predict the local temperature and strain distributions which supported microstructural findings. Thus, through high-speed impact experiments carried out at different angles along with advanced microscopy and numerical simulations, this work helped reveal the microstructural response of 15-5 PH stainless steel in a range of dynamic shear conditions.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research was performed while the author held an NRC Research Associateship award at Air Force Institute of Technology. The authors would like to acknowledge Air Force Office of Scientific Research for sponsoring this work. Dr. Anupam Vivek and Dr. Glenn Daehn acknowledge the support of the National Science Foundation under Grant Opportunities for Academic Liaison with Industry (GOALI), Award No. 1538736. Special thanks go to Dr. Varun Gupta (Pacific Northwest National Laboratory) for discussion on simulation, Dr. Nicholas Morris (Air Force Research Laboratory) for help with the nano-indenter, Dr. Robert Wheeler (Air Force Research Laboratory) for help with microscopy, and AFIT Model Fabrication Shop for support with manufacturing and sectioning.

Compliance with ethical standards

Data availability

The data sets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Supplementary material

Supplementary material 1 (WMV 19142 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Balanethiram VS, Hu X, Altynova M, Daehn GS (1994) Hyperplasticity: enhanced formability at high rates. J. Mater Process Technol 45(1–4):595–600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lum E, Palazotto AN, Dempsey A (2017) Analysis of the effects of additive manufacturing on the material properties of 15-5PH stainless steel. In: 58th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/structures structural dynamics and materials conference, pp 1–13Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Giovanola JH (1988) Adiabatic shear banding under pure shear loading Part I: direct observation of strain localization and energy dissipation measurements. Mech Mater 7(1):59–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Andrade U, Meyers MA, Vecchio KS, Chokshi AH (1994) Dynamic recrystallization in high-strain, high-strain-rate plastic deformation of copper. Acta Metall Mater 42(9):3183–3195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ak Steel 15-5 ph® precipitation hardening stainless steel, Condition H 900Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    AK Steel, 15-5 PH stainless steel product data bulletin. http://www.aksteel.com/sites/default/files/2018-01/155ph201706.pdf. Accessed 06 Apr 2018
  7. 7.
    Srinath J, Manwatkar SK, Murty SVSN, Narayanan PR, Sharma SC, George KM (2015) Metallurgical analysis of a failed 17-4 PH stainless steel pyro bolt used in launch vehicle separation Systems. Mater Perform Charact 4(1):29–44Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Graves WT, Liu D, Palazotto AN (2016) Topology optimization of a penetrating warhead. In: 57th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference, pp 1–13Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carpenter SH, Wittman RH (1975) Explosion welding. Annu Rev Mater Sci 5(1):177–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Walsh JM, Shreffler RG, Willig FJ (1953) Limiting conditions for jet formation in high velocity collisions. J Appl Phys 24(3):349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Patterson RA (1993) Fundamentals of explosion welding. ASM Handb 6:160–164Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hansen SR, Vivek A, Daehn GS (2015) Impact welding of aluminum alloys 6061 and 5052 by vaporizing foil actuators: heat-affected zone size and Peel strength. J Manuf Sci Eng 137(5):051013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vivek A, Hansen SR, Liu BC, Daehn GS (2013) Vaporizing foil actuator: a tool for collision welding. J Mater Process Technol 213(12):2304–2311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hahn M, Weddeling C, Taber G, Vivek A, Daehn GS, Tekkaya AE (2016) Vaporizing foil actuator welding as a competing technology to magnetic pulse welding. J Mater Process Technol 230:8–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang Y et al (2011) Application of high velocity impact welding at varied different length scales. J Mater Process Technol 211(5):944–952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Vivek A, Liu BC, Hansen SR, Daehn GS (2014) Accessing collision welding process window for titanium/copper welds with vaporizing foil actuators and grooved targets. J Mater Process Technol 214(8):1583–1589CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bahrani AS, Black TJ, Crossland B (1967) The mechanics of wave formation in explosive welding. Proc R Soc Lond A 296(1445):123–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Greenberg BA et al (2013) The problem of intermixing of metals possessing no mutual solubility upon explosion welding (Cu–Ta, Fe–Ag, Al–Ta). Mater Charact 75:51–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Akbari Mousavi AA, Al-Hassani STS (2005) Numerical and experimental studies of the mechanism of the wavy interface formations in explosive/impact welding. J Mech Phys Solids 53(11):2501–2528CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Liu B, Vivek A, Lin W, Prothe C, Daehn GS (2015) Solid-state dissimilar joining of Ti-Fe with Nb and Cu interlayers. Weld J 94(7):219s–224sGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vivek A, Hansen SR, Daehn GS (2014) High strain rate metalworking with vaporizing foil actuator: control of flyer velocity by varying input energy and foil thickness. Rev Sci Instrum 85(7):075101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hansen SR, Vivek A, Daehn GS (2014) Control of velocity, driving pressure, and planarity during flyer launch with vaporizing foil actuator. In 6th International conference high speed form, pp 325–334Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johnson JR et al (2008) Coupling experiment and simulation in electro-magnetic forming using photon Doppler. In: 3rd International conference high speed form, pp 35–44Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Liu B, Vivek A, Daehn GS (2015) Use of vaporizing foil actuator for impact welding of aluminum alloy sheets with steel and magnesium alloysGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nassiri A, Vivek A, Abke T, Liu B, Lee T, Daehn G (2017) Depiction of interfacial morphology in impact welded Ti/Cu bimetallic systems using smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Appl Phys Lett 110(23):231601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nassiri A (2015) Investigation of wavy interfacial morphology in magnetic pulsed welding: mathematical modeling, numerical simulations and experimental tests. University of New Hampshire, DurhamGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chu Q, Zhang M, Li J, Yan C (2017) Experimental and numerical investigation of microstructure and mechanical behavior of titanium/steel interfaces prepared by explosive welding. Mater Sci Eng A 689:323–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nassiri A, Kinsey B (2016) Numerical studies on high-velocity impact welding: smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) and arbitrary Lagrangian–Eulerian (ALE). J Manuf Process 24:376–381CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Nassiri A, Kinsey B, Chini G (2016) Shear instability of plastically-deforming metals in high-velocity impact welding. J Mech Phys Solids 95:351–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nassiri A, Vivek A, Abke T, Liu B, Lee T, Daehn G (2017) Depiction of interfacial morphology in impact welded Ti/Cu bimetallic systems using smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Appl Phys Lett 110:23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Liu G-R, Liu MB (2003) Smoothed particle hydrodynamics: a meshfree particle method. World Scientific, SingaporeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Anderson CE, Weiss CE, Chocron S (2011) Impact experiments into borosilicate glass at three scale sizes. J Appl Mech 78(5):051011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Li XJ, Mo F, Wang XH, Wang B, Liu KX (2012) Numerical study on mechanism of explosive welding. Sci Technol Weld Join 17(1):36–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Liu B, Vivek A, Presley M, Daehn GS (2018) Dissimilar impact welding of 6111-T4, 5052-H32 aluminum alloys to 22MnB5, DP980 steels and the structure-property relationship of a strongly bonded interface. Metall Mater Trans A Phys Metall Mater Sci 49(3):899–907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kapil A, Lee T, Vivek A, Bockbrader J, Abke T, Daehn G (2018) Benchmarking strength and fatigue properties of spot impact welds. J Mater Process Technol 255:219–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wittman RH (1975) An experimentally verified model for predicting impact welding parameters. MS Thesis, College of Engineering, University of Denver, DenverGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cowan GR, Bergmann OR, Holtzman AH (1971) Mechanism of bond zone wave formation in explosion-clad metals. Metall Mater Trans B 2(November):3145–3155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hunt JN (1968) Wave formation in explosive welding. Philos Mag 17(148):669–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Szecket A (1985) wavy versus straight interface in the explosive welding of aluminum to steel. J Vac Sci Technol A Vac Surf Film 3(6):2588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Jaramillo D, Szecket A, Inal OT (1987) On the transition from a waveless to a wavy interface in explosive welding. Mater Sci Eng 91:217–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wu J, Fang H, Yoon S, Kim H, Lee C (2006) The rebound phenomenon in kinetic spraying deposition. Scr Mater 54(4):665–669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mousavi SAAA, Sartangi PF (2009) Experimental investigation of explosive welding of cp-titanium/AISI 304 stainless steel. Mater Des 30(3):459–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Akbari Mousavi AA, Burley SJ, Al-Hassani STS (2005) Simulation of explosive welding using the Williamsburg equation of state to model low detonation velocity explosives. Int J Impact Eng 31(6):719–734CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Griffiths BJ (1987) Mechanisms of white layer generation with reference to machining and deformation processes. J Tribol 109(86):525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Aramcharoen A, Mativenga PT (2008) White layer formation and hardening effects in hard turning of H13 tool steel with CrTiAlN and CrTiAlN/MoST-coated carbide tools. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 36(7–8):650–657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pan R, Ren R, Chen C, Zhao X (2017) The microstructure analysis of white etching layer on treads of rails. Eng Fail Anal 82(January):39–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Nassiri A, Chini G, Vivek A, Daehn G, Kinsey B (2015) Arbitrary Lagrangian-Eulerian finite element simulation and experimental investigation of wavy interfacial morphology during high velocity impact welding. Mater Des 88:345–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Inal OT (1985) Explosive welding of Ti–6Al–4V to mild-steel substrates. J Vac Sci Technol A Vac Surf Film 3(6):2605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Yang Y, Wang BF, Xiong J, Zeng Y, Chen ZP, Yang XY (2006) Adiabatic shear bands on the titanium side in the titanium/mild steel explosive cladding interface: experiments, numerical simulation, and microstructure evolution. Metall Mater Trans A 37(10):3131–3137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    McAuliffe C, Waisman H (2015) A unified model for metal failure capturing shear banding and fracture. Int J Plast 65:131–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Manikandan P, Hokamoto K, Deribas AA, Raghukandan K, Tomoshige R (2006) Explosive welding of titanium/stainless steel by controlling energetic conditions. Mater Trans 47(8):2049–2055CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Grignon F, Benson D, Vecchio KS, Meyers MA (2004) Explosive welding of aluminum to aluminum: analysis, computations and experiments. Int J Impact Eng 30(10):1333–1351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Yan YB, Zhang ZW, Shen W, Wang JH, Zhang LK, Chin BA (2010) Microstructure and properties of magnesium AZ31B-aluminum 7075 explosively welded composite plate. Mater Sci Eng A 527:2241–2245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Zhang GS, Hou SZ, Wei SZ, Li JW, Xu LJ (2011) Interface structure and properties of explosive welded beryllium bronze/steel composite plates. Appl Mech Mater 52–54:1598–1602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Nassiri A, Chini G, Kinsey B (2014) Spatial stability analysis of emergent wavy interfacial patterns in magnetic pulsed welding. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 63(1):245–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Air Force Institute of TechnologyWright Patterson Air Force BaseDaytonUSA
  2. 2.Simulation Innovation and Modeling Center (SIM Center)The Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  3. 3.Department of Materials Science and EngineeringThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations