Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T14:57:07.731Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Matrix strength evaluation of ultra-fine grained steel by nanoindentation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 March 2011

T. Ohmura
Affiliation:
National Institute for Materials Science, 1-2-1 Sengen, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0047, Japan
K. Tsuzaki
Affiliation:
National Institute for Materials Science, 1-2-1 Sengen, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0047, Japan
N. Tsuji
Affiliation:
Department of Adaptive Machine Systems, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University, 2-1 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan
N. Kamikawa
Affiliation:
Department of Adaptive Machine Systems, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University, 2-1 Yamadaoka, Suita, Osaka 565-0871, Japan
Get access

Abstract

Nanoindentation was performed to evaluate the matrix strength of the ultra-fine grained steel produced by accumulative roll-bonding and subsequently annealed. The nanohardness, associated with the matrix strength, decreases with increasing annealing temperature. Because the matrix strength corresponds to the first term σ0 of the Hall–Petch relation, this result suggests that the σ0 might not be constant for these steels between various grain sizes. Therefore, it is suggested that the change of the macroscopic strength during annealing is dominated by not only the grain coarsening leading to a reduction of grain refinement strengthening, but also the softening of the matrix strength.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Shaw, L.L., J. Metals 52 41 (2001).Google Scholar
2.Tsuji, N., Tetsu-to-Hagane 88 359 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Tsuji, N., Ito, Y., Saito, Y. and Minamino, Y., Scr. Mater 47, 893 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Vakiev, R.Z., Chmelik, F., Bordeaux, F., Kapelski, G. and Baudelet, B., Scr. Metall. Mater. 27 855 (1992).Google Scholar
5.Horita, Z., Smith, D.J., Furukawa, M., Nemoto, M., Valiev, R.Z.and Langdon, T.G., J. Mater. Res. 11, 1880 (1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.Murayama, M., Horita, Z.and Hono, K.Acta Mater. 49 21 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Ohmura, T., Tsuzaki, K. and Matsuoka, S., Scr. Mater. 45 889 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Ohmura, T., Tsuzaki, K.and Matsuoka, S., Philos. Mag. A 82 1903 (2002).Google Scholar
9.Ohmura, T., Hara, T. and Tsuzaki, K., J. Mater. Res. 18 1465 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Tsuji, N., Saito, Y., Utsunomiya, H. and Tanigawa, S., Scr. Mater. 40 795 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Tsuji, N., Ueji, R. and Minanino, Y., Scr. Mater. 47 69 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Oliver, W.C. and Pharr, G.M., J. Mater. Res. 7 1564 (1992).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Itokazu, M. and Murakami, Y.Trans. Jpn. Soc. Mech. Eng. A59 2560 (1993).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Gouldstone, A., Koh, H-J., Zeng, K-Y., Giannakopoulos, A.E. and Suresh, S., Acta Mater. 48 2277 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar