0
Research Papers

Analysis of Failure in Dual Phase Steel Sheets Subject to Electrohydraulic Forming

[+] Author and Article Information
Javad Samei

Department of Mechanical, Automotive,
and Materials Engineering,
University of Windsor,
401 Sunset Avenue,
Windsor, ON N9B3P4, Canada
e-mail: sameij@uwindsor.ca

Daniel E. Green

Department of Mechanical, Automotive,
and Materials Engineering,
University of Windsor,
401 Sunset Avenue,
Windsor, ON N9B3P4, Canada
e-mail: dgreen@uwindsor.ca

Sergey Golovashchenko

Ford Research and Advanced Engineering,
Dearborn, MI 48124
e-mail: sgolovas@ford.com

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Manufacturing Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING. Manuscript received September 29, 2013; final manuscript received June 25, 2014; published online August 6, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Brad L. Kinsey.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 136(5), 051010 (Aug 06, 2014) (8 pages) Paper No: MANU-13-1356; doi: 10.1115/1.4027940 History: Received September 29, 2013; Revised June 25, 2014

In previous work, the formability of dual phase steel sheets formed under quasi-static and high strain rate conditions was investigated in macroscale (Golovashchenko et al., 2013, “Formability of Dual Phase Steels in Electrohydraulic Forming,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 213, pp. 1191–1212) and microscale (Samei et al., 2013, “Quantitative Microstructural Analysis of Formability Enhancement in Dual Phase Steels Subject to Electrohydraulic Forming,” J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 22(7), pp. 2080–2088). The Nakazima test and electrohydraulic forming (EHF) were used for quasi-static and high strain rate forming, respectively. It was shown that dual phase steel sheets exhibit hyperplastic behavior when subject to EHF into a conical die and the micromechanisms of formability improvement were discussed (Samei et al., 2014, “Metallurgical Investigations on Hyperplasticity in Dual Phase Steel Sheets,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. (in press)). In this paper, mechanisms of failure in dual phase steels formed under quasi-static and EHF conditions are discussed. For this purpose, the nucleation, growth, and volume fraction of voids were studied. Also, fractography was carried out to understand the different types of fractures in the three grades of dual phase steels. The main objective of this work was to determine how failure was suppressed in the EHF specimens formed in the conical die compared to the Nakazima specimens. The impact of the sheet against the die was found to be the major reason for the delay in failure in the EHF specimens.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Avramovic-Cingara, G., Saleh, Ch. A. R., Jain, M. K., and Wilkinson, D. S., 2009, “Void Nucleation and Growth in Dual-Phase Steel 600 During Uniaxial Tensile Testing,” Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 40A, pp. 3117–3127. [CrossRef]
Samei, J., Green, D. E., and Golovashchenko, S., 2013, “Quantitative Analysis of the Voids in Dual Phase Steel Sheets Formed Under Quasi-Static Conditions,” Materials Science and Technology Conference and Exhibition (MS&T’13), Montreal, Quebec, Canada, pp. 2412–2416.
He, X. J., Terao, N., and Berghezan, A., 1984, “Influence of Martensite Morphology and Its Dispersion on Mechanical Properties and Fracture Mechanisms of Fe-Mn-C Dual Phase Steels,” Met. Sci., 18(7), pp. 367–373. [CrossRef]
Ray, R. K., 1984, “Tensile Fracture of a Dual-Phase Steel,” Scr. Metall., 18(11), pp. 1205–1209. [CrossRef]
Westphal, M., Mcdermid, J. R., Boyd, J. D., and Embury, J. D., 2010, “Novel Thermal Processing of Dual Phase Steels II—Work Hardening and Fracture Mechanisms,” Can. Metall. Q., 49, pp. 91–98. [CrossRef]
Steinbrunner, D. L., Matlock, D. K., and Krauss, G., 1988, “Void Formation During Tensile Testing of Dual Phase Steels,” Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 19A, pp. 579–589. [CrossRef]
Sun, X., Choi, K. S., Soulami, A., Liu, W. N., and Khaleel, M. A., 2009, “On Key Factors Influencing Ductile Fractures of Dual Phase Steels,” Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 526(1–2), pp. 140–149. [CrossRef]
Kim, N. J., and Thomas, G., 1981, “Effects of Morphology on the Mechanical Behavior of a Dual Phase Fe/2si/0.1c Steel,” Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 12(3), pp. 483–489. [CrossRef]
Ahmad, E., Manzoor, T., Ali, K. L., and Akhter, J. I., 2000, “Effect of Microvoid Formation on the Tensile Properties of Dual-Phase Steel,” J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 9(3), pp. 306–310. [CrossRef]
Speich, G. R., and Miller, R. L., 1979, “Mechanical Properties of Ferrite-Martensite Steels, in Structure and Properties of Dual-Phase Steels,” Structure and Properties of Dual-Phase Steels, R.A. Kot and J.W. Morris, eds., New York, pp. 145–182.
Marder, A. R., 1982, “Deformation Characteristics of Dual-Phase Steels,” Metall. Trans. A, 13A(1), pp. 85–92. [CrossRef]
Bayram, A., Uğuz, A., and Ula, M., 1999, “Effects of Microstructure and Notches on the Mechanical Properties of Dual-Phase Steels,” Mater. Charact., 43(4), pp. 259–269. [CrossRef]
Liao, C., Sun, F., and Lan, F., 1979, “An Investigation of Quasi-Cleavage Fracture in Steel,” Acta Metall. Sin., 15(2), pp. 259–265.
Nakazima, K., Kikuma, T., and Hasuka, K., 1968, “Study on the Formability of Steel Sheets,” Yawata Tech. Rep., 264, pp. 8517–8530.
Golovashchenko, S. F., Gillard, A. J., Cedar, D. A., and Ilinich, A. M., 2009, “Electrohydraulic Forming Tool,” Ford Global Technologies, U.S. Patent No. 7,516,634.
Golovashchenko, S. F., Gillard, A. J., and Mamutov, A. V., 2013, “Formability of Dual Phase Steels in Electrohydraulic Forming,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 213, pp. 1191–1212. [CrossRef]
Hassannejadasl, A., Green, D. E., Golovashchenko, S. F., Samei, J., and Maris, C., 2014, “Numerical Modeling of Electrohydraulic Free-Forming and Die-Forming of DP590 Steel,” J. Manuf. Processes, 16(3), pp. 391–404. [CrossRef]
Samei, J., Green, D. E., Golovashchenko, S., and Hassannejadasl, A., 2013, “Quantitative Microstructural Analysis of Formability Enhancement in Dual Phase Steels Subject to Electrohydraulic Forming,” J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 22(7), pp. 2080–2088. [CrossRef]
Samei, J., Green, D. E., and Golovashchenko, S., 2014, “Metallurgical Investigations on Hyperplasticity in Dual Phase Steel Sheets,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 136(4), p. 041010. [CrossRef]
Balanethiram, V. S., 1996, “Hyperplasticity: Enhanced Formability of Sheet Metals at High Workpiece Velocity,” Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Sarraf, I. S., Samei, J., Green, D., and Golovashchenko, S., 2013, “Strain Hardening in Dual Phase Steel Sheets Formed Into a Conical Die Using an Electrohydraulic Forming Process,” Materials Science and Technology Conference and Exhibition (MS&T’13), Montreal, Quebec, Canada, pp. 2587–2594.
Dieter, G. E., 1986, Mechanical Metallurgy, McGraw-Hill, New York.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Procedure for the quantitative analysis of voids, (1) through-thickness micrograph, (2) enhancement of contrast of the micrograph, and (3) micrograph in the image analysis software

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

(a) DP500, (b) DP780, and (c) DP980 Nakazima specimens, and (d) DP500, (e) DP780, and (f) DP980 conical EHF specimens

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Nucleation of voids as a result of cracking and separation in the martensite bands in (a) DP500, (b) DP780 Nakazima specimens (QS), (c) DP500, and (d) DP780 EHF specimens

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Voids inside martensite islands in (a) DP500 formed by EHF, (b) DP780 formed by EHF, (c) DP980 by the Nakazima test (QS), and (d) DP980 formed by EHF

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

DP780 specimen formed by EHF: (a) TEM image showing dislocation accumulation and nucleation and growth of nanovoids at the ferrite/martensite interface, (b) microcracks at the ferrite/martensite interface

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Locations of quantitative analysis of voids in the DP980 (a) Nakazima and (b) EHF specimens

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Voids in DP500 EHF specimen at a von Mises effective strain of (a) 0.1, (b) 0.2, (c) 0.3, (d) 0.4, (e) 0.5, and (f) 0.6 (mm/mm). The voids are seen as black spots in the white matrix.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Void area fraction as a function of von Mises effective strain in (a) DP500, (b) DP780, and (c) DP980, formed in a Nakazima test (QS) and by EHF

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Mean Void Area as a function of strain in (a) DP500, (b) DP780, and (c) DP980 formed in a Nakazima test (QS) and by EHF

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Ductile fracture in (a) DP500 and (b) DP980 formed in the Nakazima test, and (c) DP500 and (d) DP780 formed by EHF

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Quasi-cleavage fracture shown with “X” symbol in a DP780 specimen formed in (a) the Nakazima test and (b) by EHF

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Shear fracture in (a) DP500 and (b) DP500 with greater magnification, (c) DP780 and (d) DP980 formed by EHF

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In