DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Study on the Hydrogen Delayed Fracture Property of TRIP Steel by Slow Strain Rate Testing Method

일정 변형률 시험에 의한 TRIP강의 수소 지연파괴 특성연구

  • Cho, J.H. (Department of Display Materials Engineering, Soonchunhyang University) ;
  • Lee, J.K. (Department of Display Materials Engineering, Soonchunhyang University)
  • 조정현 (순천향대학교 디스플레이 신소재공학과) ;
  • 이종권 (순천향대학교 디스플레이 신소재공학과)
  • Received : 2011.03.31
  • Accepted : 2011.08.22
  • Published : 2011.08.01

Abstract

The demands of high-strength steel have been steadily increased to reduce the weight of vehicles. Although the TRIP steel has been the promising candidate material for the purpose, high strength hinders the application due to the susceptibility to hydrogen delayed fracture in the corrosive environment. Moreover, the testing method was not specified in the ISO standards. In this work, the test method to evaluate the susceptibility of hydrogen delayed fracture was studied by slow strain rate testing technique. The four test experimental parameters were studied : strain rate, hydrogen charging time, holding time after hydrogen charging, and holding time after cadmium plating. The steel was fractured by hydrogen in case the strain rate was in the range of $1{\times}10^{-4}{\sim}5{\times}10^{-7}/sec$. It was confirmed that the slow strain rate test is effective method to evaluate the susceptibility to hydrogen delayed fracture. The holding time over 24 hrs after hydrogen charging, nullified the hydrogen effect, that is, the specimen was no more susceptible to hydrogen after 24 hrs even though the specimen was fully hydrogen-charged. Moreover, cadmium electroplating could not prevent from diffusing out the hydrogen from the steel in the experiment. The effective experimental procedures were discussed.

Keywords

References

  1. O. Grassel, L. Kruger, G. Frommeyer, and L. W. Meyer, Int. J. Plast., 16, 1391 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-6419(00)00015-2
  2. G. Frommeyer, U. Brux, and P. Neumann, ISIJ Int., 43, 438 (2003). https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.43.438
  3. Dong Bin Im, Chang Gil Lee, Sung Joon Kim, and Ik Min Park, J. Korea Inst. Met & Mater, 40, 8 (2002).
  4. J. F. Lessar and W. W. Gerberich, Metall. Trans. A, 7A, 953 (1976).
  5. M. Nagumo, ISIJ Int., 41, 590 (2001). https://doi.org/10.2355/isijinternational.41.590
  6. M. R. Louthan, G. R. Caskey, J. A. Donovan, and D. E. Rawl, Mater. Sci. Eng., 10, 357 (1972).
  7. J. P. Hirth, Metall. Trans. A, 11A, 861 (1980).
  8. N. R. Moody, S. L. Robinson, and W. M. Garrison Jr., Res. Mec., 30, 143 (1990).
  9. W. Y. Choo and J. Y. Lee, Metall. Trans. A, 13A, 135 (1982).
  10. Sung Joon Kim, Trends in Metals and Materials Engineering, 16, 103 (2003).
  11. E. Gold and T. J. Koppenaal, ASM Trans., 62, 607 (1969).
  12. R. A. McCoy and W. W. Gerberich, Metall. Trans., 4, 539 (1973). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02648707
  13. Q. Yang and J. L. Luo, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 288, 75 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-5093(00)00833-9
  14. L. Zhang, M. Wen, M. Imade, S. Fukuyama, and K. Yokogawa, Acta Mater., 56, 3414 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actamat.2008.03.022