| Literature DB >> 35268978 |
Xuewen Chen1, Bo Zhang1, Yuqing Du1, Mengxiang Liu1, Rongren Bai1, Yahui Si1, Bingqi Liu1, Dong-Won Jung2, Akiyoshi Osaka1,3.
Abstract
Titanium alloy is widely applied in aerospace, medical, shipping and other fields due to its high specific strength and low density. The purpose of this study was to analyze the formability of Ti6Al4V alloys at elevated temperatures. An accurate constitutive model is the basic condition for accurately simulating the plastic forming of materials, and it is an important basis for optimizing the parameters of the hot forging forming process. In this study, the optimization algorithm was used to accurately identify the high-temperature constitutive model parameters of Ti6Al4V titanium alloy, and the hot working diagram was established to optimize the hot forming process parameters. The optimal forming conditions of Ti6Al4V titanium alloy are given. Ti6Al4V alloy was subjected to high-temperature compression tests at 800-1000 °C and at strain rates of 0.01-5 s-1 on a Gleeble-1500D thermal/mechanical simulation machine. Each parameter of the Hansel-Spittel constitutive model was taken as an independent variable, and the accumulated error between the stress calculated by the constitutive model and the stress obtained by experimentation was used as an objective function. Based on response surface methodology, an inverse optimization method for identifying the parameters of the high-temperature constitutive model of Ti6Al4V alloy is proposed in this paper. An orthogonal test design was adopted to obtain sample point data, and a third-order response surface approximate model was established. The genetic algorithm (GA) was applied to reversely optimize the parameters of the constitutive model. To verify the accuracy of the optimized constitutive model, the average absolute relative error (AARE) and correlation coefficient (R) were used to evaluate the reliability of optimized constitutive model. The R value of the model was 0.999, and the AARE value was 0.048, respectively, indicating that the established high-temperature constitutive model for Ti6Al4V alloy has good calculation accuracy. The flow stress behavior of the material could be accurately delineated. Meanwhile, in order to study the formability of Ti6Al4V alloy, the hot processing map of the alloy, based on a dynamic material model, was established in this paper. The optimum hot working domains of the Ti6Al4V alloy were determined within 840-920 °C/0.01-0.049 s-1 and 940-980 °C/0.11-1.65 s-1; the hot processing map was verified in combination with the microstructure, and the fine and equiaxed grains and a large amount of β phase could be found at 850 °C/0.01 s-1.Entities:
Keywords: Ti6Al4V alloy; formability; high-temperature constitutive model; hot processing map; response surface method; reverse optimization
Year: 2022 PMID: 35268978 PMCID: PMC8911093 DOI: 10.3390/ma15051748
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1Original microstructure of Ti6Al4V.
Chemical composition of Ti6Al4V (wt, %).
| Ti | Al | V | Fe | C | N | H | O |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bal. | 6.11 | 3.93 | 0.131 | 0.016 | <0.005 | <0.001 | 0.113 |
Figure 2Test process scheme of Ti6Al4V.
Figure 3True stress–strain curves of Ti6Al4V: (a) = 0.01 s−1; (b) = 0.1 s−1; (c) = 1 s−1; (d) = 5 s−1.
Figure 4Microstructure of Ti6Al4V under various deformation conditions: (a) 800 °C/0.01 s−1; (b) 850 °C/0.01 s−1; (c) 850 °C/5 s−1; (d) 900 °C/0.01 s−1; (e) 950 °C/0.01 s−1; (f) 1000 °C/0.01 s−1.
Figure 5Parameter identification flow chart.
Hansel-Spittel model orthogonal test factor levels.
| Level | Factor | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | m1 | m2 | m3 | m4 | m5 | m7 | m8 | m9 | |
| 1 | 345 | −0.0092 | −0.01 | −0.19 | −0.0032 | 0.002 | −2.3 | 0.00039 | 0.9 |
| 2 | 350 | −0.0093 | −0.03 | −0.2 | −0.0033 | 0.0025 | −2.4 | 0.0004 | 1 |
| 3 | 355 | −0.0094 | −0.05 | −0.21 | −0.0034 | 0.003 | −2.5 | 0.00041 | 1.1 |
| 4 | 360 | −0.0095 | −0.07 | −0.22 | −0.0035 | 0.0035 | −2.6 | 0.00042 | 1.2 |
Design arrangement and response of orthogonal experiment.
| Group Number | Parameter | Result | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | m1 | m2 | m3 | m4 | m5 | m7 | m8 | m9 |
| |
| 1 | 345 | −0.0092 | −0.01 | −0.19 | −0.0032 | 0.002 | −2.3 | 0.00039 | 0.9 | 0.624348 |
| 2 | 345 | −0.0093 | −0.03 | −0.2 | −0.0033 | 0.0025 | −2.4 | 0.0004 | 1 | 0.337491 |
| 3 | 345 | −0.0094 | −0.05 | −0.21 | −0.0034 | 0.003 | −2.5 | 0.00041 | 1.1 | 0.03274 |
| 4 | 345 | −0.0095 | −0.07 | −0.22 | −0.0035 | 0.0035 | −2.6 | 0.00042 | 1.2 | 0.511145 |
| 5 | 350 | −0.0092 | −0.01 | −0.2 | −0.0033 | 0.003 | −2.5 | 0.00042 | 1.2 | 0.815538 |
| 6 | 350 | −0.0093 | −0.03 | −0.19 | −0.0032 | 0.0035 | −2.6 | 0.00041 | 1.1 | 0.008196 |
| 7 | 350 | −0.0094 | −0.05 | −0.22 | −0.0035 | 0.002 | −2.3 | 0.0004 | 1 | 0.39574 |
| 8 | 350 | −0.0095 | −0.07 | −0.21 | −0.0034 | 0.0025 | −2.4 | 0.00039 | 0.9 | 0.648502 |
| 9 | 355 | −0.0092 | −0.03 | −0.21 | −0.0035 | 0.002 | −2.4 | 0.00041 | 1.2 | 0.474217 |
| 10 | 355 | −0.0093 | −0.01 | −0.22 | −0.0034 | 0.0025 | −2.3 | 0.00042 | 1.1 | 0.029997 |
| 11 | 355 | −0.0094 | −0.07 | −0.19 | −0.0033 | 0.003 | −2.6 | 0.00039 | 1 | 0.314332 |
| 12 | 355 | −0.0095 | −0.05 | −0.2 | −0.0032 | 0.0035 | −2.5 | 0.0004 | 0.9 | 0.58867 |
| 13 | 360 | −0.0092 | −0.03 | −0.22 | −0.0034 | 0.003 | −2.6 | 0.0004 | 0.9 | 0.554467 |
| 14 | 360 | −0.0093 | −0.01 | −0.21 | −0.0035 | 0.0035 | −2.5 | 0.00039 | 1 | 0.234209 |
| 15 | 360 | −0.0094 | −0.07 | −0.2 | −0.0032 | 0.002 | −2.4 | 0.00042 | 1.1 | 0.083837 |
| 16 | 360 | −0.0095 | −0.05 | −0.19 | −0.0033 | 0.0025 | −2.3 | 0.00041 | 1.2 | 0.305932 |
| 17 | 345 | −0.0092 | −0.07 | −0.19 | −0.0035 | 0.0025 | −2.5 | 0.0004 | 1.1 | 0.02964 |
| 18 | 345 | −0.0093 | −0.05 | −0.2 | −0.0034 | 0.002 | −2.6 | 0.00039 | 1.2 | 0.269416 |
| 19 | 345 | −0.0094 | −0.03 | −0.21 | −0.0033 | 0.0035 | −2.3 | 0.00042 | 0.9 | 0.55 |
| 20 | 345 | −0.0095 | −0.01 | −0.22 | −0.0032 | 0.003 | −2.4 | 0.00041 | 1 | 0.376197 |
| 21 | 350 | −0.0092 | −0.07 | −0.2 | −0.0034 | 0.0035 | −2.3 | 0.00041 | 1 | 0.136266 |
| 22 | 350 | −0.0093 | −0.05 | −0.19 | −0.0035 | 0.003 | −2.4 | 0.00042 | 0.9 | 0.562345 |
| 23 | 350 | −0.0094 | −0.03 | −0.22 | −0.0032 | 0.0025 | −2.5 | 0.00039 | 1.2 | 0.27384 |
| 24 | 350 | −0.0095 | −0.01 | −0.21 | −0.0033 | 0.002 | −2.6 | 0.0004 | 1.1 | 0.187258 |
| 25 | 355 | −0.0092 | −0.05 | −0.21 | −0.0032 | 0.0025 | −2.6 | 0.00042 | 1 | 0.300622 |
| 26 | 355 | −0.0093 | −0.07 | −0.22 | −0.0033 | 0.002 | −2.5 | 0.00041 | 0.9 | 0.634336 |
| 27 | 355 | −0.0094 | −0.01 | −0.19 | −0.0034 | 0.0035 | −2.4 | 0.0004 | 1.2 | 0.786602 |
| 28 | 355 | −0.0095 | −0.03 | −0.2 | −0.0035 | 0.003 | −2.3 | 0.00039 | 1.1 | 0.035255 |
| 29 | 360 | −0.0092 | −0.05 | −0.22 | −0.0033 | 0.0035 | −2.4 | 0.00039 | 1.1 | 0.061428 |
| 30 | 360 | −0.0093 | −0.07 | −0.21 | −0.0032 | 0.003 | −2.3 | 0.0004 | 1.2 | 1.17284 |
| 31 | 360 | −0.0094 | −0.01 | −0.2 | −0.0035 | 0.0025 | −2.6 | 0.00041 | 0.9 | 0.659364 |
| 32 | 360 | −0.0095 | −0.03 | −0.19 | −0.0034 | 0.002 | −2.5 | 0.00042 | 1 | 0.460461 |
Analysis of variance of the response surface model.
| DOF | SS | MS | F |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| model | 27 | 2.34076 | 0.086695 | 6.16 | 0.044 * |
| A | 1 | 0.01336 | 0.013362 | 0.95 | 0.385 |
| m1 | 1 | 0.16988 | 0.169881 | 12.08 | 0.025 * |
| m2 | 1 | 0.233 | 0.233004 | 16.56 | 0.015 * |
| m3 | 1 | 0.08033 | 0.080328 | 5.71 | 0.075 |
| m4 | 1 | 0.18458 | 0.184576 | 13.12 | 0.022 * |
| m5 | 1 | 0.13818 | 0.138182 | 9.82 | 0.035 * |
| m7 | 1 | 0.00505 | 0.005048 | 0.36 | 0.581 |
| m8 | 1 | 0.01566 | 0.015663 | 1.11 | 0.351 |
| m9 | 1 | 0.39514 | 0.395143 | 28.09 | 0.006 ** |
|
| 1 | 0.03172 | 0.031718 | 2.25 | 0.208 |
|
| 1 | 0.05035 | 0.050352 | 3.58 | 0.131 |
|
| 1 | 0.20433 | 0.204329 | 14.52 | 0.019 * |
|
| 1 | 0.00602 | 0.00602 | 0.43 | 0.549 |
|
| 1 | 0.00363 | 0.00363 | 0.26 | 0.638 |
|
| 1 | 0.21908 | 0.219076 | 15.57 | 0.017 * |
|
| 1 | 0.38767 | 0.38767 | 27.56 | 0.006 ** |
| Am1 | 1 | 0.02075 | 0.020747 | 1.47 | 0.291 |
| Am2 | 1 | 0.05836 | 0.05836 | 4.15 | 0.111 |
| Am3 | 1 | 0.28912 | 0.289116 | 20.55 | 0.011 * |
| Am4 | 1 | 0.0653 | 0.065299 | 4.64 | 0.097 |
| Am5 | 1 | 0.15959 | 0.159592 | 11.34 | 0.028 * |
| Am8 | 1 | 0.02056 | 0.020563 | 1.46 | 0.293 |
| m1m2 | 1 | 0.19687 | 0.196867 | 13.99 | 0.02 * |
| m1m3 | 1 | 0.20296 | 0.20296 | 14.43 | 0.019 * |
| m1m5 | 1 | 0.20578 | 0.205777 | 14.63 | 0.019 * |
|
| 1 | 0.22876 | 0.228762 | 16.26 | 0.016 * |
|
| 1 | 0.05061 | 0.050614 | 3.6 | 0.131 |
| error | 4 | 0.05627 | 0.014068 | ||
| total | 31 | 2.39703 | |||
* means significant (0.01 < p < 0.05), ** means extremely significant (p < 0.01).
Figure 6Response surface of the influence of parameters m1 and m5 on the objective function value .
Optimal parameters of the Ti6Al4V constitutive model.
| Parameter | A | m1 | m2 | m3 | m4 | m5 | m7 | m8 | m9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| optimal value | 356.307 | −0.00935 | −0.032 | −0.2007 | −0.0033 | 0.00317 | −2.356 | 0.00041 | 1.089 |
Figure 7Comparison of calculated values of the improved Hansel–Spittel model and experimental values: (a) = 0.01 s−1; (b) = 0.1 s−1; (c) = 1 s−1; (d) = 5 s−1.
Figure 8Relationship between experimental and calculated flow stress values.
Figure 9Hot processing maps at various strains: (a) 0.1; (b) 0.2; (c) 0.4; (d) 0.6.
Figure 10Microstructure of the safe domain and the unstable domain of Ti6Al4V: (a) 850 °C/0.01 s−1; (b) 900 °C/5 s−1.