Comparison of Two Different Rolling Processes on Microstructure and Properties of Ferrite-Bainite Dual-Phase Pipeline Steels

Article Preview

Abstract:

The microstructure and mechanical properties of ferrite-bainite dual-phase pipeline steels respectively produced by thermomechanical control process (TMCP) and intercritical annealing were studied using optical microscope, scanning electron microscope (SEM), Vickers hardness tester and MTS 810 servo-hydraulic machine. The results show that these two processes obtain different morphology and distribution of microstructure, but the mechanical properties of them are similar and superior, especially the yield ratios are low. It is found that for TMCP steel, the grains of ferrite are large and the average ferrite grain size is approximately 6.1µm. The bainite structures are lump-shaped with concentrated distribution in the ferrite matrix and the band structure is obvious. For steels produced by intercritical annealing process, the grains are finer and the distribution of bainite is uniform on the ferrite grain boundaries. From the rolling plane to the centre, the grain sizes of ferrite in these two microstructures increase obviously, and the volume fraction of bainite first increases significantly, then decreases slightly in the TMCP steel and the average volume fraction is approximately 60.1%. However, the bainite volume fraction in the intercritical annealing steel decreases gradually and the average volume fraction is approximately 35.4%. Moreover, hardness values in through-thickness direction are uniform in the TMCP steel and these values are also similar in the intercritical annealing steel except the values in the region near the rolling plane are much larger.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 197-198)

Pages:

724-729

Citation:

Online since:

February 2011

Export:

Price:

[1] Shoujin Sun, Martin Pugh: Materials Science and Engineering A Vol. 335(2002), p.298.

Google Scholar

[2] R. Bakhtiari, A. Ekrami: Materials Science and Engineering A Vol. 525 (2009), p.159.

Google Scholar

[3] N. Saeidi, A. Ekrami: Materials Science and Engineering A Vol. 523 (2009), p.125.

Google Scholar

[4] U. Liedl, S. Traint and E.A. Werner: Computational Materials Science Vol. 25 (2002), p.122.

Google Scholar

[5] A. Kumar, S.B. Singh and K.K. Ray: Materials Science and Engineering A Vol. 472(2008), p.270.

Google Scholar

[6] M. Sarwar, R. Priestner: Journal of Materials Science Vol. 31 (1996), p. (2091).

Google Scholar

[7] E. Ahmad, T. Manzoor and N. Hussain: Materials Science and Engineering A Vol. 508 (2009), p.259.

Google Scholar

[8] Xu Ran, Qingwu Cai , Duotian Jiao and Huibin Wu: Material & Heat Treatment Vol. 38 (2009), p.37 (In Chinese).

Google Scholar

[9] M.H. Saleh, R. Priestner: Journal of Meterials Processing Technology Vol. 113(2001), p.587.

Google Scholar

[10] A. Bayram, A. Uguz and M. Ula: Materials Characterization Vol. 43(1999), p.259.

Google Scholar

[11] Helin Li, Xiao Li, Lingkang Ji and Hongda Chen: Welded Pipe and Tube Vol. 30(2007), p.6 (In Chinese).

Google Scholar

[12] Mingchun Zhao, Ke Yang and Yiyin Shan: Materials Letters Vol. 57 (2003), p.1496.

Google Scholar

[13] B.Q. Han, S. Yue: Journal of Materials Processing Technology Vol. 136(2003), p.100.

Google Scholar

[14] P.D. Hodgson, M.R. Hickson and R. K. Gibbs: Scripta Materialia Vol. 40 (1999), p.1179.

Google Scholar

[15] Wei Wang, Wei Yan, Lin Zhu, Ping Hu, Yiyin Shan and Ke Yang: Materials and Design Vol. 30 (2009), p.3436.

Google Scholar

[16] Furen Xiao, Bo Liao, Yiyin Shan, Guiying Qiao, Yong Zhong, Chunling Zhang and Ke Yang: Materials Science and Engineering A Vol. 431 (2006), p.41.

Google Scholar