1. Introduction
It is well known that the deformation and fracture properties of structural steels are significantly influenced by the factors like type of load, loading rate, and temperature [
1,
2]. Typically, 304L stainless steel is extensively used in a wide range of load-bearing applications due to its superior corrosion resistance, formability, and mechanical properties [
1,
3,
4,
5]. In structural engineering, different components may experience the severe thermal loading situations that might be induced by local intense fire, laser irradiation, or by aerodynamic heating [
6]. The development of thermal stresses, along with a distinct degradation of mechanical properties at high temperatures, may considerably increase the possibility of fracture in structural components exposed to high operational loads [
7,
8]. It is therefore worthwhile to investigate the predictions of the mechanical responses of steel structures exposed to loaded conditions. An understanding of the plastic response of the 304L stainless steel under severe environment is crucial to develop a complete characterization of the material.
The variation in material strength with applied stress or strain is the key consideration in the design of classes of materials used in structures exposed to suddenly applied loads. Normally, materials dynamic deformation and failure mode are heavily dependent on the nature of stress, strain rate, and elevated temperatures [
9,
10,
11]. With the tremendous development and access to high power laser systems, there is an emerging desire to understand the behavior of structural components under laser irradiation. Considering the laser damage effect of structural materials under severe situations, a brief review of related studies is presented. Yang et al. [
12] explored Continuous Wave (CW) laser damage effect on steel structure under preloaded invariable stretching stress conditions. The dumbbell-shaped 30CrMnSiA steel sample was preloaded with invariable stretching force, and then irradiated by YAG laser. To relate the stretching stress and failure temperature, an empirical formula was proposed. Long et al. [
13] established the relationships among different experimental factors including pre-load, laser power density, and the thickness on the rupture time of the composite laminates. Chang et al. [
14] proposed an analytical tool for prediction of the behavior of composite and metallic structures exposed to simultaneous mechanical loading and intense laser heating. The developed methodology consists of a thermal analysis that describes nonlinear events like temperature dependent thermophysical parameters, re-irradiation losses, and melting or ablation processes. Medford et al. [
4] developed a numerical model to predict fracture threshold and the thermomechanical response of structural materials under the conditions of simultaneous action of mechanical loading and laser heating. A remarkable reduction in room temperature tensile strength and damaging threshold energy was reported under the combined action of mechanical loading and laser exposure. Griffis et al. [
7] experimentally determined the response of aluminum alloy subjected to simultaneous constant tensile load and rapidly localized heating condition. With the help of the developed thermal and stress computational model, the prediction of the required heating time for a ductile fracture of the irradiated section was obtained.
Considering laser heating of the preloaded materials, materials strength dependency on high temperature and strain rate is found to be complex and nonlinear. Due to the associated complexities in the laser heating (non-uniformity in temperature profile etc.) and dependency of material strength on strain and temperature, understanding how the structural components deform under transient impact conditions is still an open research field. The current work reported the effects of thermomechanical parameters on the deformation behavior and fracture characteristics of 304L stainless steel subjected to the simultaneous action of tensile loading and laser irradiations. A CW ytterbium fiber laser with a wavelength of 1.08 µm was employed to irradiate the specimens, while sample pre-loading was provided by the universal tensile testing machine. The stress-strain characteristics, stress relaxation behavior, failure time, temperature profiles, and fractographs have been explored in detail to characterize the 304L stainless steel failure mechanisms.
2. Materials and Methods
The material under investigation is 304L stainless steel supplied by ASM Inc. (Orlando, FL, USA) in the 2mm thick sheet form. Chemical composition (wt. %) of the 304L stainless steel reported from the supplier is 0.0237 C, 1.46 Mn, 0.299 Si, 17.99 Cr, 9.78 Ni, 0.022 Cu, 0.261 Mo, 1.191 Co and Fe to balance. The thermophysical and mechanical properties of the 304L steel are given in
Table 1.
For the experimentation, test specimens were prepared into a rectangular, bar shape, with dimensions of 150 × 10 mm
2. The specimens were prepared with sufficient length (80 mm gauge length) to ensure a region about the center in which the temperature does not vary much along the length. Moreover, in normal tensile testing, the standard test sample (machined into a reduced section or in dog bone shape) is required to avoid fractures in the grips. In the present situation, since the gripped portion of the test specimen (heated by laser) is much cooler than the central part, a dogbone shape is not required to avoid fractures in the gripped section.
Figure 1 provides a schematic presentation of laser irradiation to the preloaded specimen. The equipment arrangement for the experimental setup is available in the previously published article [
17].
Room temperature yield strength of the 304L stainless steel was measured using the universal tensile testing machine (JVJ-50S, SIOMM, Shanghai, China); average yield strength was found to be of 511 MPa. Experiments were performed under the conditions of four different preload levels, including 40%, 55%, 70%, and 85% of the measured yield strength (511 MPa) of 304L stainless steel. The actual values of preload levels are presented in
Table 2. All the tensile loading tests were conducted using the above-mentioned universal tensile testing machine under a fixed crosshead speed of 3 mm/min. After reaching the prescribed load level, the specimens were kept under a constant loading state for a while before the laser was started. The loading profiles in the following Figures 3 and 4 represent the mechanical responses of the material after reaching the prescribed loading level (and the laser on), by ignoring the initial part (before reaching the prescribed load) of the loading curves.
The continuous wave ytterbium fiber laser (RFL-C1000, Raycus, Wuhan, China), with 1.08 µm wavelength and 1 kW maximum power output, was employed to heat specimens during the experiments. The laser started to irradiate the specimens after they reached a prescribed loading state. The distance between the laser emitter and the tensile loaded specimen was 70 cm. The laser spot with a 12 mm diameter was perpendicularly focused on the center of the test specimen. The laser spot size irradiating on the specimen was controlled by adjusting the distance from the focus lens to the specimen’s surface. The experiments were conducted by employing a wide range of laser power densities, including 398 W·cm−2, 556 W·cm−2, 696 W·cm−2, 883 W·cm−2, 972 W·cm−2, and 1078 W·cm−2 for each preload level. The specimens were continuously irradiated until their failure occurred and applied tensile load dropped to zero. To get more reliable results, the experiments were repeated three times under each condition. However, no considerable difference in the results of multiple trials was found.
During the experiment, the specimen fracture process was observed and recorded simultaneously with a high-speed video camera. An infrared radiation pyrometer (KMGA740-LO, Kleiber Infrared GmbH, Unterwellenborn, Germany) was used to record the temperature profile during the laser irradiation process. The temperature was recorded for the laser spot center at the front surface of the specimen which was directly exposed to laser irradiations. The tensile loading data was used to characterize the material strength degradation and stress/strain failure behavior. After the experiments, metallographic observations were conducted using a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM, FEI Quanta 250F, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Hillsboro, OR, USA), in order to get a more in-depth analysis of the failure mode, and to understand the mechanism within the specimen’s thickness.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, M.J. and Z.S.; Methodology, Z.L. and M.J.; Formal Analysis, M.J. and Z.L.; Investigation, M.J.; Writing-Original Draft Preparation, M.J.; Writing-Review & Editing, N.U.H. and M.S.; Supervision, Z.S.
Funding
This research was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China grant number [61605079] and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities grant number [30916014112-020].
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to publish the results.
References
- Lee, W.-S.; Lin, C.-F. Impact properties and microstructure evolution of 304L stainless steel. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2001, 308, 124–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.; Young, B. Stress–strain curves for stainless steel at elevated temperatures. Eng. Struct. 2006, 28, 229–239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faggiano, B.; Matteis, G.D.; Landolfo, R.; Mazzolani, F.M. Behaviour of aluminium alloy structures under fire. J. Civ. Eng. Manag. 2004, 10, 183–190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Medford, J.E.; Gray, P.M. The response of structural materials to combined laser and mechanical loading. In 15th Thermophysics Conference; AIAA: Snowmass, CO, USA, 1980; p. 1550. [Google Scholar]
- Shanmugam, N.S.; Buvanashekaran, G.; Sankaranarayanasamy, K.; Manonmani, K. Some studies on temperature profiles in AISI 304 stainless steel sheet during laser beam welding using FE simulation. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2009, 43, 78–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Semb, E. Behavior of Aluminum at Elevated Strain Rates and Temperatures. Master’s Thesis, Institutt for konstruksjonsteknikk, Trondheim, Norway, 14 June 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Griffis, C.; Chang, C.; Stonesifer, F. Thermo-mechanical response of tension panels under intense rapid heating. Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech. 1985, 3, 41–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jelani, M.; Li, Z.; Shen, Z.; Sardar, M.; Tabassum, A. Experimental investigations on thermo mechanical behaviour of aluminium alloys subjected to tensile loading and laser irradiation. In Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium on Laser Interaction with Matter, Chengdu, China, 6–9 November 2016; SPIE: Bellingham, WA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Sierakowski, R.L. Strain rate behavior of metals and composites. In Proceedings of the Convegno IGF XIII Cassino 1997, Cassino, Italy, 27–28 May 1997. [Google Scholar]
- El-Magd, E.; Abouridouane, M. Characterization, modelling and simulation of deformation and fracture behaviour of the light-weight wrought alloys under high strain rate loading. Intern. J. Impact Eng. 2006, 32, 741–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, W.S.; Sue, W.C.; Lin, C.F.; Wu, C.J. The strain rate and temperature dependence of the dynamic impact properties of 7075 aluminum alloy. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2000, 100, 116–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, Y.; Ye, X.; Lin, X.; Wei, C.; Wang, L.; Cheng, D. Experimental investigation on the damage effect of steel structure by continuous laser under preloaded invariable stretching stress. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Laser Interaction with Matter, Xi’an, China, 9–12 September 2012; SPIE: Bellingham, WA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Long, L.C.; Wang, T.T.; Liu, L.T. Tensile and compression test of carbon/epoxy composite laminate under combined action of laser irradiation and load. Mater. Res. Innov. 2015, 19, 171–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, C.; Griffis, C.; Stonesifer, F.; Nemes, J. Thermomechanical effects of intense thermal heating on materials/structures. J. Thermophys. Heat Transf. 1987, 1, 175–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mousavi, S.A.; Miresmaeili, R. Experimental and numerical analyses of residual stress distributions in tig welding process for 304l stainless steel. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2008, 208, 383–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rai, R.; Elmer, J.; Palmer, T.; DebRoy, T. Heat transfer and fluid flow during keyhole mode laser welding of tantalum, Ti–6Al–4V, 304L stainless steel and vanadium. J. Phys. D Appl. Phys. 2007, 40, 5753. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jelani, Z.; Li, Z.; Shen, Z.; Sardar, M. Thermomechanical response of aluminum alloys under the combined action of tensile loading and laser irradiations. Chin. Phys. B 2018, 27, 037901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stout, M.; Follansbee, P. Strain rate sensitivity, strain hardening, and yield behavior of 304l stainless steel. J. Eng. Mater. Technol. 1986, 108, 344–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De, A.K.; Speer, J.G.; Matlock, D.K.; Murdock, D.C.; Mataya, M.C.; Comstock, R.J. Deformation-induced phase transformation and strain hardening in type 304 austenitic stainless steel. Metall. Mater. Trans. A 2006, 37, 1875–1886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McQueen, H.; Jonas, J. Recovery and recrystallization during high temperature deformation. In Treatise on Materials Science & technology; Elsevier: New York, NY, USA, 1975; Volume 6, pp. 393–493. [Google Scholar]
- Legner, H.; Popper, L.; Laughlin, W.; Pugh, E. Analysis of rp laser experiments on tensile-loaded materials. In Proceedings of the 24th Plasma Dynamics and Lasers Conference, Orlando, FL, USA, 6–9 July 1993; AIAA: Reston, VA, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Cornet, C.; Wackermann, K.; Stöcker, C.; Christ, H.; Lupton, C.; Hardy, M.; Tong, J. Effects of temperature and hold time on dynamic strain aging in a nickel based superalloy. Mater. High Temp. 2014, 31, 226–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Florando, J.; Margraf, J.; Reus, J.; Anderson, A.; McCallen, R.; LeBlanc, M.; Stanley, J.; Rubenchik, A.; Wu, S.; Lowdermilk, W. Modeling the effect of laser heating on the strength and failure of 7075-T6 aluminum. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2015, 640, 402–407. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jelani, M.; Li, Z.; Shen, Z.; Sardar, M. Failure response of simultaneously pre-stressed and laser irradiated aluminum alloys. Appl. Sci. 2017, 7, 464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maleque, M.A.; Salit, M.S. Mechanical failure of materials. In Materials Selection and Design; Springer: Berlin, Germany, 2013; pp. 17–38. [Google Scholar]
- Santos, J.L.d.; Monteiro, S.N.; Cândido, V.S.; Silva, A.O.d.; Tommasini, F.J. Fracture modes of aisi type 302 stainless steel under metastable plastic deformation. Mater. Res. 2017, 596–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srivatsan, T.S.; Sriram, S.; Veeraraghavan, D.; Vasudevan, V. Microstructure, tensile deformation and fracture behaviour of aluminium alloy 7055. J. Mater. Sci. 1997, 32, 2883–2894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wojtaszek, M.; Sleboda, T.; Czulak, A.; Weber, G.; Hufenbach, W. Quasi-static and dynamic tensile properties of ti-6al-4v alloy. Arch. Metall. Mater. 2013, 58, 1261–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, P.; Lu, S.; Xiao, N.; Li, D.; Li, Y. Effect of delta ferrite on impact properties of low carbon 13Cr-4Ni martensitic stainless steel. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2010, 527, 3210–3216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hassan, S.F.; Zabiullah, S.; Al-Aqeeli, N.; Gupta, M. Magnesium nanocomposite: Effect of melt dispersion of different oxides nano particles. J. Mater. Res. 2016, 31, 100–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dieter, G.E.; Bacon, D.J. Mechanical Metallurgy; McGraw-hill: New York, NY, USA, 1986; Volume 3. [Google Scholar]
- Xue, Y.; McDowell, D.; Horstemeyer, M.; Dale, M.; Jordon, J. Microstructure-based multistage fatigue modeling of aluminum alloy 7075-t651. Eng. Fract. Mech. 2007, 74, 2810–2823. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, Y.; Zhang, W.; Zeng, L.; Cui, G.; Chen, W. Room-temperature and high-temperature tensile mechanical properties of TA15 titanium alloy and TiB whisker-reinforced TA15 matrix composites fabricated by vacuum hot-pressing sintering. Materials 2017, 10, 424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Talonen, J.; Hänninen, H. Formation of shear bands and strain-induced martensite during plastic deformation of metastable austenitic stainless steels. Acta Mater. 2007, 55, 6108–6118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hamada, A.; Karjalainen, L.; Misra, R.; Talonen, J. Contribution of deformation mechanisms to strength and ductility in two Cr–Mn grade austenitic stainless steels. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2013, 559, 336–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, B.; Tan, J.; Pauly, S.; Kühn, U.; Eckert, J. Stable fracture of a malleable Zr-based bulk metallic glass. J. Appl. Phys. 2012, 112, 103533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1.
Schematic presentation of laser irradiation to the preloaded specimen.
Figure 2.
Temperature evolution during the laser irradiation of tensile loaded 304L stainless steel specimens for various laser power densities and tensile preload values. (a) 205 MPa, (b) 281 MPa, (c) 358 MPa and (d) 434 MPa.
Figure 3.
Stress relaxation characteristics of 304L stainless steel specimens deformed under different laser power densities and preloading levels: (a) 205 MPa, (b) 281 MPa, (c) 358 MPa and (d) 434 MPa.
Figure 4.
Strength degradation of 304L stainless steel specimens deformed under different laser power densities and preloading levels: (a) 205 MPa, (b) 281 MPa, (c) 358 MPa and (d) 434 MPa.
Figure 5.
Failure time variation of 304L stainless steel specimens against (a) laser power density and (b) tensile load for varying experimental conditions.
Figure 6.
SEM images revealing the fracture morphology of 304L stainless steel specimen deformed under the condition of 205 MPa preload and for different laser power densities of (a) 398 W·cm−2, (b) 696 W·cm−2 and (c) 972 W·cm−2 respectively.
Figure 7.
SEM images revealing the fracture morphology of 304L stainless steel specimen deformed under the condition of 281 MPa preload and for different laser power densities of (a) 398 W·cm−2, (b) 696 W·cm−2 and (c) 972 W·cm−2 respectively.
Figure 8.
SEM images revealing the fracture morphology of 304L stainless steel specimen deformed under the condition of 358 MPa preload, and for different laser power densities: (a) 398 W·cm−2, (b) 696 W·cm−2 and (c) 972 W·cm−2 respectively.
Figure 9.
SEM images revealing the fracture morphology of 304L stainless steel specimen deformed under the condition of 434 MPa preload, and for different laser power densities: (a) 398 W·cm−2, (b) 696 W·cm−2 and (c) 972 W·cm−2 respectively.
Table 1.
Thermo-physical and mechanical properties of 304L stainless steel, data from [
15,
16].
Property | Value |
---|
Yield strength (MPa) | 511 |
Density (g·cm−3) | 7.9 |
Melting point (°C) | 1410–1496 |
Absorption coefficient | 0.30 |
Thermal conductivity (W·m−1·K−1) | 27 |
Table 2.
Experimental parameters: laser power densities and tensile load values.
Laser Power Density (W·cm−2) | 398 | 556 | 696 | 883 | 972 | 1078 |
Stress (MPa) | 205 | 281 | 358 | 434 | ... | ... |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).