Microstructures and mechanical properties of dissimilar Nd:YAG laser weldments of AISI4340 and AISI316L steels
- 100 Downloads
This paper presents studies on the microstructure and mechanical properties of AISI 316L stainless steel and AISI 4340 low-alloy steel joints formed by the Nd:YAG laser welding process. The weld microstructures and heat affected zones (HAZs) were investigated. Austenitic microstructures were observed in all of the samples. The sizes of the HAZs changed when the heat input was varied, and the 316L sides exhibited a larger HAZ. The cooling rates were calculated by measuring the solidification dendrite arm spacing. It is shown that high cooling rates lead to an austenitic microstructure. Tensile tests were carried out, and the results revealed the tensile properties of both the base metals and the weldments. The hardness test results agreed well with the tensile test results.
Keywordsstainless steel laser welding welded joints microstructure mechanical properties cooling rate
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- R.P. Martukanitz, A critical review of laser beam welding, [in] Proceedings of the International Society for Optical Engineering, San Jose, California, 2005, p. 11.Google Scholar
- ASTM E8/E8M-08, Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2008.Google Scholar
- J.C. Lipoid and D.J. Kotecki, Welding Metallurgy and Weldability of Stainless Steels, 2nd Ed., John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, 2005, p. 143.Google Scholar
- S. Kou, Welding Metallurgy, 2nd Ed., John Wiley & Sons Inc., New Jersey, 2003, p. 279.Google Scholar
- J.M. Vitek, S.A. David, and C.R. Hinman, Improved ferrite number prediction model that accounts for cooling rate effects: Part 1. Model development, Weld. J., 82(2003, No. 1, 10.Google Scholar
- M.A. Valiente-Bermejo, L. Karlsson, and T. DebRoy, Influence of low energy laser welding on solidification and microstructure of austenitic stainless steel welds, [in] The 14th Nordic Laser Materials Processing Conference NOLAMP 14, Gothenburg, 2013, p. 26.Google Scholar