Assessment of Hydrogen Embrittlement Susceptibility and Mechanism(s) in Quench and Tempered AISI 4135 Steel Using A Novel Fast Fracture Test in Bending

doi:10.1007/s40195-022-01439-x

Abstract

Abstract:

A newly proposed rapid fracture test in four-point bending was used to evaluate the effect of tempering on the hydrogen embrittlement (HE) susceptibility of an AISI 4135 steel, where it was tempered to four different strength (or hardness) levels. It was observed that HE susceptibility increases with the increase in hardness. It was shown that there will be minimal impact of hydrogen (H) on the fracture of materials with hardness 37 HRC and below, even if they are completely saturated with H. On the other hand, H will have similar detrimental effect on fracture properties of quench and tempered (Q and T) steels having hardness higher than 45 HRC. Ductile to brittle transition behavior was observed for a critical hardness (or strength) range as well as for a critical concentration level of H. Additionally, a critical H concentration was observed to exist for each of the strength levels. Fractography was performed in addition to microstructural characterization using transmission electron microscopy (TEM). A very good correlation was observed between the fast fracture test results and fractography. The fast fracture test was further compared with a conventional incremental step load (ISL) test for the evaluation of HE susceptibility. The ISL test results and fracture surface characteristics corroborate very well with the observations from the fast fracture test. This study successfully establishes the fast fracture test as a novel technique to study HE susceptibility and mechanism(s).

Key words: Hydrogen embrittlement (HE), Mechanical testing, Fracture mechanics, Martensitic steel, Hardness, Dislocation density

Tuhin Das, Salim V. Brahimi, Jun Song, Stephen Yue. Assessment of Hydrogen Embrittlement Susceptibility and Mechanism(s) in Quench and Tempered AISI 4135 Steel Using A Novel Fast Fracture Test in Bending[J]. Acta Metallurgica Sinica (English Letters), 2023, 36(7): 1078-1094.

Figures/Tables 15

Table 1 Chemical composition of the AISI 4135 steel (wt%)

C	Mn	Ni	Cr	Mo	Si	S	P	Cu	AI	V
0.35	0.90	0.04	0.95	0.16	0.25	0.015	0.01	0.06	0.001	0.02

Fig. 1 chematic of the heat treatment schedule for the Steels

Fig. 2 imensions of ASTM F519 (type 1e) single edged notch bend square bar specimen (adopted from [34])

Fig. 3 a NFS% for the Steels, obtained from the fast fracture (FF) test and the ISL test in 3.5 wt% NaCl solution at − 1.2 VSCE. b Average failure load (or notch fracture strength) obtained from the fast fracture (FF) test and ISL test for the four Steels in the absence and presence of H. c Load versus time plot obtained from the fast fracture test in case of Steel 3 (shown as an example), both in the absence of H and after precharging of H for various time intervals starting from 30 min to 48 h

Fig. 4 Evolution of fracture load with the increase in H precharging time for the four different steels

Fig. 5 Bright field TEM images after mapping showing the microstructure in a Steel 1, b Steel 4

Table 2 Quantitative analysis of microstructural features for Steel 1 and Steel 4

	CarBides			Dislocation Density(m^-2)
	Length(mm) Width(nm) Number density(m^-3)			Intra-lath(TEM) GND(EBSD) Total
Steel 1	35±25	15±6	6±1×10¹¹	4.5×10¹⁴	2.6×10¹⁴	7.1×10¹⁴
Steel 4	44±20	7±3	1±0.3×10¹²	7.5×10¹⁴	4.3×10¹⁴	1.2×10¹⁵

Fig. 6 Bright field TEM images showing the carbide distribution in a Steel 1, b Steel 4

Fig. 7 a Bright field TEM image of cementite distribution in Steel 1. b Dark field image of a, with SAD pattern (top right corner) identified as cementite

Fig. 8 a Bright field TEM image and SAD pattern for ε-carbide in Steel 4. b Bright field TEM image and SAD pattern for η-carbide in Steel 4

Fig. 9 Load displacement plots for Steel 1 and Steel 4 obtained from the fast fracture test both in the absence of H and presence of H (with 1 h of H precharging)

Fig. 10 Fracture surface morphologies from the notch root area obtained after fast fracture test following 1 h of precharging at 500 × for a Steel 1, c Steel 2, e Steel 3 g Steel 4, respectively. b, d, f and h The same at higher magnification i.e., 2000 × for Steel 1, Steel 2, Steel 3 and Steel 4, respectively

Fig. 11 racture surface morphologies from the notch root area for Steel 2 after fast fracture test: a, b 3 h of precharging, c, d 24 h of precharging, e, f 48 h of precharging

Fig. 12 racture surface morphologies from the notch root area for Steel 3 after fast fracture test with a 24 h of precharging and b 48 h of precharging, at 500 ×. Fracture surface morphologies from the notch root area for Steel 3 after fast fracture test following 30 min of precharging at c 500 × and d 2000 ×

Fig. 13 Fracture surface morphologies from the notch root area for Steel 1 after a ISL test at -1.2 VSCE in 3.5 wt% NaCl and b fast fracture test following 48 h precharging. Fracture surface morphologies from the notch root area for Steel 4 after c ISL test at − 1.2 VSCE in 3.5 wt% NaCl and d fast fracture test following 48 h precharging

References 48

[1]	Y. Chung, L.K. Fulton, J. Fail. Anal. 17, 330 (2017).
[2]	D. Li, R.P. Gangloff, J.R. Scully, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 35, 849 (2004). DOI URL
[3]	T. Doshida, M. Nakamura, H. Saito, T. Sawada, K. Takai, Acta Mater. 61, 7755 (2013). DOI URL
[4]	E. Akiyama, M. Wang, S. Li, Z. Zhang, Y. Kimura, N. Uno, K. Tsuzaki, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 44, 1290 (2013). DOI URL
[5]	T. Das, S.K. Rajagopalan, S.V. Brahimi, X. Wang, S. Yue, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 716, 189 (2018). DOI URL
[6]	K. Ogawa, Y. Matsumoto, H. Suzuki, K. Takai, ISIJ Int. 59, 1705 (2019). DOI URL
[7]	T. Das, S.V. Brahimi, J. Song, S. Yue, Corros. Sci. 190, 109701 (2021). DOI URL
[8]	X. Li, X. Ma, J. Zhang, E. Akiyama, Y. Wang, X. Song, Acta Metall. Sin. Engl. Lett. 33, 759 (2020).
[9]	S. Lynch, Corros. Rev. 30, 105 (2012).
[10]	F07 Committee, Test Method for Measurement of Hydrogen Embrittlement Threshold in Steel by the Incremental Step Loading Technique(ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, US).
[11]	A. Atrens, C.C. Brosnan, S. Ramamurthy, A. Oehlert, I.O. Smith, Meas. Sci. Technol. 4, 1281 (1993). DOI URL
[12]	N. Winzer, A. Atrens, W. Dietzel, G. Song, K.U. Kainer, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 472, 97 (2008). DOI URL
[13]	J.A. Beavers, G.H. Koch,Corrosion 48, 256 (1992). DOI URL
[14]	E. Martínez-Pañeda, Z.D. Harris, S. Fuentes-Alonso, J.R. Scully, J.T. Burns, Corros. Sci. 163, 108291 (2020). DOI URL
[15]	F07 Committee, Test Method for Mechanical Hydrogen Embrittlement Evaluation of Plating/Coating Processes and Service Environments (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, US).
[16]	S.V. Brahimi, K.R. Sriraman, S. Yue, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part C J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 231, 3214 (2017).
[17]	F16 Committee, Test Method for Process Control Verification to Prevent Hydrogen Embrittlement in Plated or Coated Fasteners (ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, US).
[18]	J. Venezuela, Q. Liu, M. Zhang, Q. Zhou, A. Atrens, Corros. Sci. 99, 98 (2015). DOI URL
[19]	L. Raymond,U.S. Patent 5,505,095, 9 April, 1996.
[20]	SV Brahimi, S Yue, KR Sriraman, Philos(2017). Trans. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 375: 20160407.
[21]	H.J. Maier, W. Popp, H. Kaesche, Acta Mater. 35, 875 (1987). DOI URL
[22]	M. Wang, E. Akiyama, K. Tsuzaki, Corros. Sci. 48, 2189 (2006). DOI URL
[23]	T. Das, E. Legrand, S.V. Brahimi, J. Song, S. Yue, Eng. Fract. Mech. 224, 106714 (2020). DOI URL
[24]	L.B. Pfeil,Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A Contain. Pap. Math. Phys. Char. 112, 182 (1926).
[25]	L. Zhong, R. Wu, A.J. Freeman, G.B. Olson, Phys. Rev. B 62, 13938 (2000). DOI URL
[26]	J. Song, W.A. Curtin, Nat. Mater. 12, 145 (2013). DOI PMID
[27]	S.K. Dwivedi, M. Vishwakarma,Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 43, 21603 (2018). DOI URL
[28]	S. Brahimi, Hydrogen Embrittlement in Steel Fasteners, (2014), (Accessed May 5, 2022).
[29]	H. Bhadeshia, R. Honeycombe,in Steels: Microstructure and Properties (Fourth Edition), edited by H. Bhadeshia and R. Honeycombe (Butterworth-Heinemann, 2017), pp. 237-270.
[30]	Y. Sun, J. Chen, J. Liu,Acta Metall. Sin. 51, 1315 (2015).
[31]	J. Peŝiĉka, A. Dronhofer, G. Eggeler, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 387, 176 (2004).
[32]	A. Dronhofer, J. Pešicka, A. Dlouhỳ, G. Eggeler,Int. J. Mater. Res. 94, 511 (2003). DOI URL
[33]	A. Oudriss, J. Creus, J. Bouhattate, C. Savall, B. Peraudeau, X. Feaugas, Scr. Mater. 66, 37 (2012). DOI URL
[34]	S. Brahimi, Dissertation, McGill University, 2018.
[35]	M.H. Loretto,Electron Beam Analysis of Materials, 1st edn.(Springer, Netherlands, 1984), pp. 119-151.
[36]	J. Pešička, R. Kužel, A. Dronhofer, G. Eggeler, Acta Mater. 51, 4847 (2003). DOI URL
[37]	L. Jianchao, G. Yunyi, X. Zhongshu, S. Changxu, W. Liang, Acta Metall. Sin. Engl. Lett. 2, 168 (1989).
[38]	K.W. Andrews, D.J. Dyson, S.R. Keown,Interpretation of electron diffraction patterns, 1st edn. (Springer, US, 1967), pp. 152-163.
[39]	C.A. Schneider,W.S. Rasband, K.W. Eliceiri, Nat. Methods 9, 671 (2012). PMID
[40]	D. Guedes, L. Cupertino Malheiros, A. Oudriss, S. Cohendoz, J. Bouhattate, J. Creus, F. Thébault, M. Piette, X. Feaugas, Acta Mater. 186, 133 (2020). DOI URL
[41]	S. Frappart, X. Feaugas, J. Creus, F. Thebault, L. Delattre, H. Marchebois, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 534, 384 (2012). DOI URL
[42]	W.Y. Choo, J.Y. Lee, Metall. Mater. Trans. A 13, 135 (1982). DOI URL
[43]	G. E. Dieter, D. Bacon, Mechanical Metallurgy, 3rd edn. (McGraw-Hill, 1988), pp. 351-353.
[44]	M.L. Jokl, V. Vitek, C.J. McMahon, Acta Mater. 28, 1479 (1980). DOI URL
[45]	E.J. Ripling, J.H. Mulherin, P.B. Crosley, Metall. Trans. A 14, 1459 (1983). DOI URL
[46]	Y. Wang, J. Gong, W. Jiang, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 38, 12503 (2013). DOI URL
[47]	K.S. de Assis, M.A. Lage, G. Guttemberg, F.P. dos Santos, O.R. Mattos, Eng. Fract. Mech. 176, 116 (2017). DOI URL
[48]	D. Birenis, Y. Ogawa, H. Matsunaga, O. Takakuwa, J. Yamabe, Ø. Prytz, A. Thøgersen, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 756, 396 (2019). DOI URL