| Literature DB >> 30142889 |
Yong Huang1, Weisong Wu2, Shuo Cong3, Guang Ran4, Danxia Cen5, Ning Li6.
Abstract
The effect of the strain rate, experimental temperature, Zn content in the test solution, and prefilming time on the mechanical properties was investigated by a tensile test with a slow strain rate, at a chemical solution of 2.2 ppm Li and 1200 ppm B in a static autoclave with 8.2 MPa. The experimental parameters clearly affected the tensile properties. The surface morphology, fractograph, and cross-sectional microstructure were analyzed by scanning electron microscopy and transmission electron microscopy. The δ (elongation) and UTS (ultimate tensile strength) of the samples tested in chemical solution were obviously lower than those of the samples tested under a nitrogen atmosphere. However, in general, all samples showed a ductile fracture characteristic and an excellent tensile property in all experimental conditions. The δ and UTS were first increased with increasing Zn content, and then decreased at both conditions of 9.26 × 10-7/s and 4.63 × 10-7/s strain rates. The difference values of tensile properties at different strain rates showed fluctuations with increasing Zn content. The δ increased with both increasing experimental temperature and prefilming time. The UTS first decreased with increasing prefilming time and then increased. The Iscc (stress corrosion cracking susceptibility) decreased with an increasing strain rate, experiment temperature, and prefilming time. Many particles with polyhedrons were formed on the sample surfaces, which was attributed to corrosion in a periodical location at the sample surface. The average length of the particles decreased with increasing Zn content, but increased with both increasing experimental temperatures and prefilming time. The corresponding mechanism is also discussed in this work.Entities:
Keywords: 316LN stainless steel; nuclear materials; stress corrosion crack; tensile properties
Year: 2018 PMID: 30142889 PMCID: PMC6163706 DOI: 10.3390/ma11091509
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Chemical composition of 316LN SS used in the present work (mass fraction, %).
| Element | C | Si | Mn | P | S | Cr | Ni | Mo | N | Co | Fe |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Content | 0.019 | 0.22 | 1.21 | 0.014 | 0.002 | 16.96 | 13.19 | 2.38 | 0.14 | 0.012 | Bal. |
Figure 1The sketch of samples used in the slow strain rate tensile (SSRT) test (Unit: mm).
Main experimental parameters during the slow strain rate tensile (SSRT) test.
| Samples | #1 * | #2 | #3 | #4 | #5 | #6 | #7 | #8 | #9 | #10 | #11 | #12 | #13 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zn content (ppb) | 0 | 0 | 50 | 75 | 100 | 0 | 50 | 75 | 100 | 75 | 75 | 75 | 75 |
| Experiment temperature | 300 °C | 250 | 330 | 300 °C | |||||||||
| Strain rate | 9.26 × 10−7/s | 4.63 × 10−7/s | 9.26 × 10−7/s | 4.63 × 10−7/s | |||||||||
| Prefilming time, h | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 300 | 600 |
* #1 sample was tested under a nitrogen atmosphere.
Figure 2Stress–strain curves of the 316LN stainless steel tested at the conditions of (a) 0.001 mm/min tensile rate; (b) 0.0005 mm/min tensile rate; (c) different temperature; and (d) different prefilm time.
Tensile properties of 316LN SS after the SSRT test.
| Sample | #1 | #2 | #3 | #4 | #5 | #6 | #7 | #8 | #9 | #10 | #11 | #12 | #13 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UTS, MPa | 507.3 ± 5.48 | 492.7 ± 5.32 | 495.2 ± 5.35 | 491 ± 5.30 | 484.7 ± 5.23 | 480.5 ± 5.19 | 464.6 ± 5.01 | 487.7 ± 5.26 | 475.3 ± 5.13 | 477.1 ± 5.15 | 496.1 ± 5.35 | 483.3 ± 5.22 | 496.9 ± 5.36 |
| 55.0 ± 0.05 | 50.5 ± 0.05 | 52.8 ± 0.05 | 52.4 ± 0.05 | 51.7 ± 0.05 | 45.1 ± 0.05 | 44.3 ± 0.05 | 46.7 ± 0.05 | 43.4 ± 0.05 | 47.0 ± 0.05 | 53.3 ± 0.05 | 49.4 ± 0.05 | 54 ± 0.05 | |
| / | 8.2 | 4.0 | 4.7 | 6.0 | 18.0 | 19.5 | 15.1 | 21.1 | 14.5 | 3.1 | 10.2 | 1.8 |
Figure 3(a) Tensile properties vs. Zn content in the chemical solution; (b) tensile properties vs. experimental temperature; (c) tensile properties vs. prefilming time; and (d) reduced values of tensile properties when the strain rate decreases from 9.26 × 10−7/s to 4.63 × 10−7/s with different Zn content in chemical solution.
Figure 4(a) I vs. prefilming time; (b) I vs. the experimental temperature; and (c) I vs. Zn content in the chemical solution.
Figure 5SEM images showing the surface morphologies of (a) #12 sample; (b) #7 sample; (c) #8 sample; and (d) #9 sample after the SSRT test.
Figure 6Statistical analysis results of the particles on the sample surface: (a) Length vs. Zn content; (b) length vs. experiment temperature; and (c) length vs. prefilming time.
Figure 7SEM images showing the fracture structure: (a) Crack initiation area; (b) dimples.
Figure 8(a) Cross-sectional bright field TEM image of sample #12; (b–d) EDS results of locations ‘A’, ‘B’, and ‘C’ in (a), respectively.
The percentage content of the main elements in Figure 8a, wt %.
| Main Elements | Fe | Cr | Ni | C | O |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Location ‘A’ | 55.2 | 16.0 | 8.6 | 19.0 | 1.3 |
| Location ‘B’ | 53.7 | 16.2 | 9.1 | 18.6 | 2.3 |
| Location ‘C’ | 28.3 | 7.1 | 8.9 | 42.1 | 13.6 |