Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering

, Volume 38, Issue 8, pp 2205–2217 | Cite as

Fracture Characteristics of AISI D2 Tool Steel at Different Tempering Temperatures Using Acoustic Emission and Fuzzy C-Means Clustering

  • Fotouhi Mohamad
  • Teymuri Sindi Cevat
  • Ahmadi Mehdi
  • Pashmforoush Farzad
Research Article - Mechanical Engineering
First Online:
Received:
Accepted:

Abstract

In this paper, the effect of tempering on crack propagation and fracture mechanism of a cold-work tool steel is investigated. Acoustic emission (AE) monitoring with fuzzy C-means (FCM) clustering was developed in order to detect the different fracture mechanisms during fracture toughness tests of specimens tempered at 5 different temperatures from 0 to 575 °C. The obtained AE signals were analyzed by considering AE parameters such as amplitude, count, frequency, energy, and classified using FCM. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) observation was also used to determine the different fracture mechanisms. The results show that the AE characteristics and FCM classification are efficient tools in the analysis of AE signals to detect fracture mechanism, and there is a good agreement with the results of these tools and microscopic observation by SEM.

Keywords

Acoustic emission Heat treatments Failure analysis Fuzzy C-means clustering 
Open image in new window
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Muro P., Gimenez S., Iturriza Ning I.: Sintering behaviour and fracture toughness characterization of D2 matrix tool steel, comparison with wrought and PM D2. Scripta Materialia 46, 369–373 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bourithis L., Papadimitriou G D., Sideris J.: Comparison of wear properties of tool steels AISI D2 and O1 with the same hardness. Tribol. Int. 39, 479–489 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ronnie, K.M.: Handbook of Nondestructive Testing, vol.5, Acoustic Emission, 2nd edn. American Society for Nondestructive Testing, USA (1987)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    ASTM, Definitions of Terms Relating to Acoustic Emission. E610-98A (1991)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martinez-Gonzalez, E.; Picas, I.; Casellas, D.; Romeu, J.: Analysis of fracture resistance of tool steels by means of acoustic emission. European Working Group on Acoustic Emission (Vienna) 8–10 September (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mukhopadhyay C.K., Ray K.K., Jayakumar T., Raj B.: Acoustic emission–stress intensity factor relations for tensile deformation of notched specimens of AISI type 304 stainless steel. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 255, 98–106 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Raj B., Jha B.B., Rodriguez P.: Frequency spectrum analysis of acoustic emission signals obtained during tensile deformation and fracture of an AISI 316 type stainless steel. Acta Metallurgica 37(8), 2211–2215 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Casey N.F., White H., Taylor J.L.: Frequency analysis of the signals generated by the failure of constituent wires of wire rope. NDT Int. 18(6), 339–344 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee C.S., Huh J.H., Li D.M., Shin D.H.: Acoustic emission behavior during tensile tests of low carbon steel welds. Iron Steel Inst. Japan Int. 39(4), 365–370 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Khamedi, R.; Fallahi, A.; Refahi Oskouei, A.; Ahmadi, M.: The effect of martensite phase volume fraction of dual-phase steels on acoustic emission signals under tensile loading. In: 17th National Symposium on Ultrasonics, Varanasi (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Khamedi R., Fallahi A., Refahi Oskouei A.: Effect of martensite phase volume fraction on acoustic emission signals using wavelet packet analysis during tensile loading of dual phase steels. Mater. Design 31, 2752–2759 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sharma, A.; Junaidh, M.I.; Purushothaman, K.K.; Kotwal, C.P.; Paul, J.; Shalini, T.; Pant, B.; Sankaranarayanan, A.S.: Acoustic emission response of Ti6Al4 V alloy in different heat treatment conditions during tensile testing. In: Proceedings of the National Seminar on Non-Destructive Evaluation, Hyderabad, 7–9 December 2006Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rajasekhar, P.; Bhat, M.R.; Murthy, C.R.L.; Phaniraj, C.; Jayakumar, T.; Baldev, R.: Discrimination of nuclear grade steel samples subjected to different heat treatment procedures based on acoustic emission (AE) data profiling at crack initiation. In: Proceedings of the National Seminar on Non-Destructive Evaluati, Hyderabad, 7–9 December 2006Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dubuisson B.: Diagnostic Intelligence Artificielle Et Reconnaissance Des Forms. Hermes Science Publications, Paris (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bezdek J.C.: Pattern Recognition With Fuzzy Objective Function Algorithms. Plenum Press, New York (1981)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jolliffe I.T.: Principal Component Analysis. Springer, Berlin (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Oja E.: Neural networks, principal components and subspaces. Int. J. Neural Syst. 1, 61–68 (1989)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ramirez-Jimenez C., Papadakis N., Reynolds N.: Identification of failure modes in glass/polypropylene composites by means of the primary frequency content of the acoustic emission events. Compos. Sci. Technol. 64, 1819–1827 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bohse, J.: Damage analysis of polymer matrix composites by acoustic emission testing. In: Proceedings of European Working Group on Acoustic Emission, Berlin, pp. 339–348 (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    ASTM, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, E399-03 (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dunegan H.L., Harris D.C., Tatro C.A.: Fracture analysis by use of acoustic emission. Eng. Fract. Mech. 1, 105–122 (1968)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Palmer I.G., Heald P.T.: The application of acoustic emission measurements to fracture mechanics. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 11, 181–185 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ennaceur C., Lakshmi A., Herve C., Cherfaoui M.: Monitoring crack growth in pressure vessel steels by the acoustic emission technique and the method of potential difference. Int. J. Press. Vessels Piping 83, 197–204 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mitsuru A., Hideo K., Yanuki T.: Slow crack growth and acoustic emission characteristics in COD test. Eng. Fract. Mech. 7, 551–552 (1975)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Roy H., Parida N., Sivaprasad S., Tarafder S., Ray K.K.: Acoustic emissions during fracture toughness tests of steels exhibiting varying ductility. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 486, 562–571 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Teymuri Sindi C., Ahmadi Najafabadi M., Ebrahimian A.: Fracture toughness determination of heat treated AISI D2 tool steel using AE technique. Iron Steel Inst Japan Int. 51, 305–312 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bohse J.: Acoustic emission characteristics of micro-failure processes in polymer blends and composites. Compos. Sci. Technol. 60(8), 1213–1226 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fotouhi Mohamad
    • 1
  • Teymuri Sindi Cevat
    • 1
  • Ahmadi Mehdi
    • 1
  • Pashmforoush Farzad
    • 1
  1. 1.Non-destructive Testing Lab, Department of Mechanical EngineeringAmirkabir University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations