A modified dislocation density-based model of 30CrMnSiA considering the coupling effect of electroplasticity and grain refinement during the pulsed current-assisted plane strain deformation
Source abstract
Abstract
The large deformation of difficult-to-deform metal under pulsed currents involves the coupling effect of grain refinement and electroplasticity, making it challenging to capture the flow behavior accurately during severe plastic deformation. To develop a highly accurate constitutive model that accounts for the coupling effect, a current-assisted plane strain compression (CAPSC) test of 30CrMnSiA was carried out, using a peak current density (Jp) range of 0–30 A mm−2 and duty ratio (d) of 0–20%. A microstructural observation was also performed via the EBSD test on the specimens after the CAPSC test. The result indicates that the true stress decreases significantly with increased Jp and d, descending to a stable value of 13% under high Jp and high d regions. Pulsed current accelerates grain refinement, promoting the transition from low-angle grain boundaries to high-angle grain boundaries through the recovery mechanism. Fine grain sizes increased from 31.7 to 45.5% in the pulsed-current condition compared to the non-current condition. Based on the above discovery, a physical-based constitutive model frame was proposed to characterize the independent evolution and transformation of dislocation density at the grain boundary and interior. Besides, the current density is also coupled into the model as an influence term of the material parameters to capture the influence of electroplasticity on grain refinement. Comparing the test stress to the predictive stress reveals that the model accurately predicts the CAPSC stress of 30CrMnSiA with a correlation coefficient of 0.974 and an average relative error of 4.56%.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Electromagnetic Effects on Materials · Microstructure and mechanical properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (49)
Show source-provided references
1. Liu T, Shi X, Zhang J, Fei B (2019) Int J Fatigue 122:240–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.02.00110.1016/j.ijfatigue.2019.02.001 ↗
2. Hariharan K, Lee M-G, Kim M-J, Han HN, Kim D, Choi S (2015) Metall and Mater Trans A 46:3043–3051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-015-2879-310.1007/s11661-015-2879-3 ↗
3. Zhao YC, Wan M, Meng B, Xu J, Shan DB (2019) Mater Sci and Eng: A 767:138412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2019.13841210.1016/j.msea.2019.138412 ↗
4. Zhan L, Ma Z, Zhang J, Tan J, Yang Z, Li H (2016) J Alloys Compd 679:316–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2016.04.05110.1016/j.jallcom.2016.04.051 ↗
5. Zhang X, Li H, Zhan M (2018) J Alloys Compd 742:480–489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.01.32510.1016/j.jallcom.2018.01.325 ↗
6. Zhao J, Wang GX, Dong Y, Ye C (2017) J Appl Phys 122:085101. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.499893810.1063/1.4998938 ↗
7. Zhao S, Zhang R, Chong Y et al (2021) Nat Mater 20:468–472. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41563-020-00817-z10.1038/s41563-020-00817-z ↗
8. Xiao G, Xia Q, Cheng X, Long H (2016) Sci China Technol Sci 59:1656–1665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-016-0206-610.1007/s11431-016-0206-6 ↗
9. Souza PM, Sivaswamy G, Bradley L, Barrow A, Rahimi S (2022) J Mater Sci 57:20794–20814. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-022-07906-110.1007/s10853-022-07906-1 ↗
10. Meng T, Dong C, Peng C, Wang R, Feng Y (2022) J Mater Sci 57:717–730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-021-06601-x10.1007/s10853-021-06601-x ↗
11. Chen Z-J, Lin YC, He D-G, Lou Y-M, Chen M-S (2021) Mater Sci Eng A 827:142062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2021.14206210.1016/j.msea.2021.142062 ↗
12. Krishnaswamy H, Kim MJ, Hong S-T et al (2017) Mater Des 124:131–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2017.03.07210.1016/j.matdes.2017.03.072 ↗
13. Liu YZ, Wan M, Meng B (2021) Int J Mach Tools Manuf 162:103689. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2021.10368910.1016/j.ijmachtools.2021.103689 ↗
14. Xu Z, Jiang T, Huang J, Peng L, Lai X, Fu MW (2022) Int J Mach Tools Manuf 175:103871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2022.10387110.1016/j.ijmachtools.2022.103871 ↗
15. Kim M-J, Yoon S, Park S et al (2020) Appl Mater Today 21:100874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmt.2020.10087410.1016/j.apmt.2020.100874 ↗
16. Jiang T, Peng L, Yi P, Lai X (2017) J Manuf Sci Eng 139:011004. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.403390410.1115/1.4033904 ↗
17. Chermette C, Unruh K, Peshekhodov I, Chottin J, Balan T (2019) Int J Mater Form 13:269–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-019-01485-410.1007/s12289-019-01485-4 ↗
18. Can C, Lei W, Xiao X, Qinxiang X (2020) J Phys Conf Ser 1605:012125. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1605/1/01212510.1088/1742-6596/1605/1/012125 ↗
19. Liu X, Fan J, Li K et al (2021) J Alloys Compd 881:160648. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2021.16064810.1016/j.jallcom.2021.160648 ↗
20. Xiao G, Zhu N, Long J, Xia Q, Chen W (2018) J Manuf Processes 34:140–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2018.05.03410.1016/j.jmapro.2018.05.034 ↗
21. Yin B, Xue X, Tang B, Wang Y, Kou H, Li J (2020) Prog Nat Sci: Mater Int 30:526–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnsc.2020.08.00710.1016/j.pnsc.2020.08.007 ↗
22. Annasamy M, Haghdadi N, Taylor A, Hodgson P, Fabijanic D (2019) Mater Sci Eng, A 745:90–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2018.12.10210.1016/j.msea.2018.12.102 ↗
23. A Standard (2010) ASTM international: West Conshohocken, PA, USA. https://doi.org/10.1520/E0112-1010.1520/E0112-10 ↗
24. Xia QX, Chen C, Xiao GF, Zhou HY (2022) IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 1270:012003. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1270/1/01200310.1088/1757-899X/1270/1/012003 ↗
25. Ruszkiewicz BJ, Grimm T, Ragai I, Mears L, Roth JT (2017) J Manuf Sci Eng 139:110801. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.403671610.1115/1.4036716 ↗
26. Hielscher R, Silbermann CB, Schmidl E, Ihlemann J (2019) J Appl Crystallogr 52:984–996. https://doi.org/10.1107/s160057671900907510.1107/s1600576719009075 ↗
27. Jiang Y-Q, Lin YC, Wang G-Q, Pang G-D, Chen M-S, Huang Z-C (2021) J Alloys Compd 870:159534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2021.15953410.1016/j.jallcom.2021.159534 ↗
28. Magargee J, Fan R, Cao J (2013) J Manuf Sci Eng 135:061022. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.402588210.1115/1.4025882 ↗
29. Kumar W, Sharma UK, Shome M (2021) J Constr Steel Res 181:106615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2021.10661510.1016/j.jcsr.2021.106615 ↗
30. Liu K, Dong X, Xie H, Peng F (2015) Mater Sci Eng A 623:97–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2014.11.03910.1016/j.msea.2014.11.039 ↗
31. Molotskii M, Fleurov V (2000) J Phys Chem B 104:3812–3816. https://doi.org/10.1021/jp993259g10.1021/jp993259g ↗
32. Gao J, Li H, Sun X, Zhang X, Zhan M (2022) Int J Plast 157:103397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijplas.2022.10339710.1016/j.ijplas.2022.103397 ↗
33. Wang X, Xu J, Shan D, Guo B, Cao J (2016) Int J Plast 85:230–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijplas.2016.07.00810.1016/j.ijplas.2016.07.008 ↗
34. Zhao W, Liu H, Outeiro J, Xu X, Zhang J (2020) J Manuf Sci Eng 142:091006. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.404743110.1115/1.4047431 ↗
35. Borgh I, Hedström P, Persson T et al (2014) Int J Refract Met Hard Mater 43:205–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrmhm.2013.12.00710.1016/j.ijrmhm.2013.12.007 ↗
36. Xiang S, Zhang X (2019) Mater Sci Eng A 761:138026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2019.13802610.1016/j.msea.2019.138026 ↗
37. Zheng F, Chen H, Wang W, Liu R, Lian J (2022) J Mater Eng Perform 31:6473–6486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-022-06705-810.1007/s11665-022-06705-8 ↗
38. Qian L, Zhan L, Zhou B, Zhang X, Liu S, Lv Z (2021) Mater Sci Eng A 812:141144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2021.14114410.1016/j.msea.2021.141144 ↗
39. Waryoba D, Islam Z, Wang B, Haque A (2020) J Alloys Compd 820:153409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2019.15340910.1016/j.jallcom.2019.153409 ↗
40. Dong X, Shin YC (2019) Int J Mech Sci 150:576–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.10.06110.1016/j.ijmecsci.2018.10.061 ↗
41. Estrin Y, Toth LS, Molinari A, Bréchet Y (1998) Acta Mater 46:5509–552210.1016/S1359-6454(98)00196-7 ↗
42. Ding H, Shen N, Shin YC (2012) J Mater Process Technol 212:1003–1013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2011.12.00510.1016/j.jmatprotec.2011.12.005 ↗
43. Estrin Y, Kim HS (2007) J Mater Sci 42:1512–1516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-006-1282-210.1007/s10853-006-1282-2 ↗
44. Lin YC, Wen D-X, Huang Y-C, Chen X-M, Chen X-W (2015) J Mater Res 30:3784–3794. https://doi.org/10.1557/jmr.2015.36810.1557/jmr.2015.368 ↗
45. Ding H, Shen N, Shin YC (2011) Comput Mater Sci 50:3016–3025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2011.05.02010.1016/j.commatsci.2011.05.020 ↗
46. Nguyen TT, Nguyen TV, Hong S-T, Kim M-J, Han HN, Morestin F (2016) Adv Mater Sci Eng 2016:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/956041310.1155/2016/9560413 ↗
47. Tiwari J, Balaji V, Krishnaswamy H, Amirthalingam M (2022) Int J Mech Sci 227:107433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2022.10743310.1016/j.ijmecsci.2022.107433 ↗
48. Zhao J, Ren Z, Zhang H, Wang G-X, Dong Y, Ye C (2019) J Appl Phys 125:185104. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.508746510.1063/1.5087465 ↗
49. Lin YC, Wen D-X, Chen M-S, Chen X-M (2016) Appl Phys A 122:805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00339-016-0333-z10.1007/s00339-016-0333-z ↗