Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:14:34.121Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tensile fracture and fractographic analysis of 1045 spheroidized steel under hydrostatic pressure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

A. S. Kao ,
H. A. Kuhn ,
O. Richmond  and
W. A. Spitzig
A. S. Kao
Affiliation:
IBM Research Division, Almaden Research Center, 650 Harry Road, San Jose, California 95120
H. A. Kuhn
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261
O. Richmond
Affiliation:
Alcoa Technical Center, Alcoa Center, Pennsylvania 15069
W. A. Spitzig
Affiliation:
Ames Laboratory, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011
Get access

Abstract

Void formation in tensile test under hydrostatic pressure is characterized through quantitative metallography, and the fracture mechanism under pressure is analyzed by fractography. Transition of the fracture surface from the cup-and-cone under atmospheric pressure to a slant structure under high pressure is explained on the basis of the void development leading to fracture and the concomitant change in fracture mechanism. The concept of “shear blocks” is introduced to illustrate the features observed on the fracture surface of specimens tested under high pressure. It is postulated that shear blocks evolve to connect the central crack regions with the shear crack initiated on neck surface due to the severe necking deformation under applied pressure.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Materials Research , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , January 1990 , pp. 83 - 91
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1 Spitzig, W. A., Acta Metall. 27, 523 (1979).Google Scholar
2 Spitzig, W. A., Sober, R. J., and Richmond, O., Metall. Trans. A 7A, 1703 (1976).Google Scholar
3 Brownrigg, A., Spitzig, W. A., Richmond, O., Teirlinck, D., and Embury, J. D., Acta Metall. 31, 1141 (1983).Google Scholar
4 Argon, A. S. and Im, J., Metall. Trans. A 6A, 839 (1975).Google Scholar
5 Argon, A.S., Im, J., and Needleman, A., Metall. Trans. A 6A, 815 (1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6 LeRoy, G., Embury, J.D., Edward, G., and Ashby, M.F., Acta Metall. 29, 1509 (1981).Google Scholar
7 Rogers, H. C., Acta Metall. 7, 7507 (1959).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8 Argon, A. S. and McClintock, F. A., Mechanical Behavior of Materials (Addison Wesley Publ., 1966), p. 309.Google Scholar
9 Bridgman, P.W., Studies in Large Plastic Flow and Fracture (Harvard University Press, 1964), p. 38.Google Scholar
10 French, I. E. and Weinrich, P. F., Scripta Metall. 8, 87 (1974).Google Scholar