Experimental and simulated characterization of creep behavior of P92 steel with prior cyclic loading damage

doi:10.1016/j.jmst.2017.09.006

Abstract

Abstract:

The effect of prior cyclic loading on creep behavior of P92 steel was investigated. Creep tests on prior cyclic loading exposure specimens were performed at 650 °C and 130 MPa. In order to clarify the influence of prior cyclic loading on creep behavior, optical microscope, scanning electron microscope and transmission electron microscope were used. Experimental results indicate that the prior cyclic loading degrades the creep strength significantly. However, the degradation tends to be saturated with further increase in prior cyclic loading. From the view of microstructural evolution, the recovery of martensite laths takes place during prior cyclic loading exposure. This facilitates the dislocation movement during the following creep process. Therefore, premature rupture of creep test occurs. Additionally, saturated behavior of degradation can be attributed to the near completed recovery of martensite laths. Based on the effect of prior cyclic loading, a newly modified Hayhurst creep damage model was proposed to consider the prior cyclic loading damage. The main advantage of the proposed model lies in its ability to directly predict creep behavior with different levels of prior cyclic loading damage. Comparison of the predicted and experimental results shows that the proposed model can give a reasonable prediction for creep behavior of P92 steel with different level of prior cyclic loading damage.

Key words: Prior cyclic loading, Creep behavior, Martensite morphology, Life prediction

Zhang Wei, Wang Xiaowei, Gong Jianming, Jiang Yong, Huang Xin. Experimental and simulated characterization of creep behavior of P92 steel with prior cyclic loading damage[J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2017, 33(12): 1540-1548.

Figures/Tables 17

Fig. 1. Optical micrograph of as-received P92 steel.

Fig. 2. Geometry of specimen (unit: mm).

Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of various lifetime fraction of PCL (Nini: cycle number of stage II beginning; Nsta: stable cycle number; Ntan: cycle number of stage II ending).

Fig. 4. Creep curves of P92 steel at different lifetime fractions of PCL (a) and details of primary creep curves (b).

Fig. 5. Creep rupture strain vs lifetime fraction of PCL curve.

Fig. 6. Variations of creep life and reduction in creep life at different lifetime fraction of PCL.

Fig. 7. Creep rate vs time plots at different fraction of PCL (a) and minimum creep rate vs lifetime fraction of PCL curve (b).

Fig. 8. Optical micrographs of outer surface near fracture location in creep failed samples with different lifetime fractions of PCL: (a) 0%; (b) 10%; (c) 20%; (d) 50%; (e) 70%.

Fig. 9. SEM images of creep fracture surface with different lifetime fractions of PCL: (a) 0%; (b) 10%; (c) 20%; (d) 50%; (e) 70%.

Fig. 10. Variation of dimple diameters at different loading conditions.

Fig. 11. TEM images of P92 steel: (a) as-received; (b) after 20% lifetime fraction of PCL.

Fig. 12. TEM images of creep fracture specimens with different lifetime fractions of PCL: (a) 0%; (b) 10%; (c) 20%; (d) 50%.

Fig. 13. Variation of martensite lath width of P92 steel with lifetime fraction of PCL before and after creep.

Table 1 Constitutive constants of P92 steel at 650 °C.

Damage constant	A (h^-1)	B (MPa^-1)	C	h (MPa)	H*	Kc (h^-1)
Value	1.286 × 10^-9	0.147	3.33	2.1 × 10⁴	0.473	2.074 × 10^-5

Fig. 14. Comparison of experimental data with predicted creep curves.

Fig. 15. Comparison of predicted data with experimental creep curves (a) and correlation between predicted and experimental creep life (b).

Table 2 Percentage errors of approximation for lifetimes and minimum creep strain rates for proposed model.

Lifetime fraction of PCL (%)	Minimum creep rate (%)	Lifetime (%)
0	1.79	0.17
10	11.04	0.20
20	7.02	2.68
50	5.45	1.30
70	3.99	2.80

References

[1]	W. Zhou, C. Lou, Z. Li, H. Yang, Appl. Energy, 87(2010), pp. 380-389
[2]	N.A. Ahmed, M. Miyatake, A.K.Al-Othman, Energy Convers. Manage., 49(2008), pp. 2711-2719
[3]	R. Kannan, V.S. Srinivasan, M. Valsan, K.B.S.Rao, Trans. Indian Inst. Met., 63(2010), pp. 571-574
[4]	P.J. Ennis, A. Czyrska-Filemonowicz, Sadhana, 28(2003), pp. 709-730
[5]	J.S. Dubey, H. Chilukuru, J.K. Chakravartty, M. Schwienheer, A. Scholz, W. Blum, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 406(2005), pp. 152-159
[6]	X.W. Wang, J.M. Gong, Y.P. Zhao, Y.F. Wang, M.H.Yu, Steel Res. Int., 86(2015), pp. 1046-1055
[7]	C. Vaillant, B. Vandenberghe, B. Hahn, H. Heuserd, C. Jochumd, Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 85(2008), pp. 38-46
[8]	K.L. Murty, I. Charit, J. Nucl. Mater., 383(2008), pp. 189-195
[9]	P. Yvon, F. Carré, J. Nucl. Mater., 385(2009), pp. 217-222
[10]	T.D. Joseph, D. McLennon, M.W. Spindler, C.E. Truman, D.J.Smith, Mater. High. Temp., 30(2013), pp. 156-160
[11]	A. Sarkar, V.D. Vijayanand, P. Parameswaran, V. Shankar, R. Sandhya, K. Laha, M.D. Mathew, T. Jayakumar, E.R.Kumar, Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 45(2014), pp. 3023-3035
[12]	V. Kalyanasundaram, S.R.Holdsworth, Trans. Indian Inst. Met., 69(2016), pp. 573-578
[13]	T. Mayama, K. Sasaki, Int. J. Plast., 22(2006), pp. 374-390
[14]	C.J. Pierce, A.N. Palazotto, A.H.Rosenberger, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 527(2010), pp. 7484-7489
[15]	L. Binda, S.R. Holdsworth, E. Mazza, Mater. High Temp., 27(2014), pp. 21-27
[16]	B. Fournier, F. Dalle, M. Sauzay, J. Longoura, M. Salvia, C. Ca?sa, I. Tourniéa, P.F. Girouxa, S.H.Kimb, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 528(2011), pp. 6934-6945
[17]	M. Kimura, K. Yamaguchi, M. Hayakawa, K. Kobayashi, K. Kanazawa, Int. J. Fatigue, 28(2006), pp. 300-308
[18]	D.W. Kim, S.S.Kim, Int. J. Fatigue, 36(2012), pp. 24-29
[19]	X.W. Wang, Y. Jiang, J.M. Gong, Y.P. Zhao, X. Huang, Steel Res. Int., 87(2016), pp. 761-771
[20]	J.S. Lee, H.G. Armaki, K. Maruyama, T. Muraki, H. Asahi, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 428(2006), pp. 270-275
[21]	M. Yurechko, C. Schroer, A. Skrypnik, J. Nucl. Mater., 432(2013), pp. 78-86
[22]	B. Fournier, M. Sauzay, A. Pineau, Int. J. Plast., 27(2011), pp. 1803-1816
[23]	G. Golański, S. Mroziński, Eng. Fail. Anal., 35(2013), pp. 692-702
[24]	F. Benjamin, S. Maxime, R. Alexandra, B. Fran?oisea, P. Andréb, J. Nucl. Mater., 386(2009), pp. 71-74
[25]	K. Gopinath, R.K. Gupta, J.K.Sahu, Mater. Des., 86(2015), pp. 411-420
[26]	K. Sawada, K. Kubo, F. Abe, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 319(2001), pp. 784-787
[27]	K. Sawada, M. Taneike, K. Kimura, F. Abe, Mater. Sci. Technol., 19(2003), pp. 739-742
[28]	F. Abe, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 387(2004), pp. 565-569
[29]	V. Dudko, A. Belyakov, R. Kaibyshev, ISIJ Int., 57(2017), pp. 540-549
[30]	R. Mishnev, N. Dudova, R. Kaibyshev, Int. J. Fatigue, 83(2016), pp. 344-355
[31]	A. Fedoseeva, N. Dudova, R. Kaibyshev, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 654(2016), pp. 1-12
[32]	A. Kipelova, A. Belyakov, R. Kaibyshev, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 532(2012), pp. 71-77
[33]	V. Skleni?ka, K. Kucha?ova, M. Svoboda, L. Kloc, J. Bur?ik, A. Kroupa, Mater. Charact., 51(2003), pp. 35-48
[34]	S. Chaudhuri, R.N.Ghosh, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 510(2009), pp. 136-141
[35]	K. Sawada, K. Suzuki, H. Kushima, M. Tabuchi, K. Kimura, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 480(2008), pp. 558-563
[36]	M. Mikami, ISIJ Int., 56(2016), pp. 1840-1846
[37]	Z. Zhang, Z.F. Hu, S. Schmauder, M. Mlikota, K. Fan, J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 25(2016), pp. 1650-1662
[38]	K. Mariappan, V. Shankar, R. Sandhya, M.D. Mathew, A.K.Bhaduri, Metall. Mater. Trans. A, 46(2015), pp. 989-1003
[39]	W. Mo?ko, P. Grzywna, Z.L. Kowalewski, J. Radziejewskac, Mater. Des., 103(2016), pp. 183-193
[40]	B.F.Dyson, Trans ASME: J. Pressure Vessel Technol., 122(2000), pp. 281-296
[41]	I.J. Perrin, D.R.Hayhurst, Int. J. Pressure Vessels Piping, 76(1999), pp. 599-617
[42]	R. Mustata, D.R. Hayhurst, J. Int, Pressure Vessels Piping, 82(2005), pp. 363-372
[43]	A. Fatemi, L. Yang, J. Int, Fatigue, 20(1998), pp. 9-34