Thermal stability of additively manufactured austenitic 304L ODS alloy

doi:10.1016/j.jmst.2020.12.033

Abstract

Abstract:

Thermal stability and high-temperature mechanical properties of a 304L austenitic oxide dispersion strengthened (ODS) alloy manufactured via laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) are examined in this work. Additively manufactured 304L ODS alloy samples were aged at temperatures of 1000, 1100, and 1200 °C for 100 h in an argon atmosphere. Microstructure characterization of LPBF 304L ODS alloy before and after the thermal stability experiments revealed that despite the annihilation of dislocations, induced cellular substructure by the LPBF process was partially retained in the ODS alloy even after aging at 1200 °C. The size of Y-Si-O nanoparticles after aging at 1200 °C increased from 25 to 50 nm. EBSD analysis revealed that nanoparticles retained the microstructure of LPBF 304L ODS and hindered recrystallization and further grain growth. At 600 °C and 800 °C, the yield stress of the 290 and 145 MPa were measured, respectively, which are substantially higher than 113 MPa, and 68 MPa for 304L at the same temperatures. Furthermore, the creep properties of LPBF 304L ODS alloy were evaluated at a temperature of 700 °C under three applied stresses of 70, 85, and 100 MPa yielding a stress exponent (n) of ~7.7; the minimum creep rate at 100 MPa was found to be about two orders of magnitude lower than found in the literature for wrought 304L stainless steel.

Key words: Laser powder bed fusion (LPBF), Oxide dispersion strengthened (ODS) alloy, High-temperature, Aging, Thermal stability

Milad Ghayoor, Saereh Mirzababaei, Anumat Sittiho, Indrajit Charit, Brian K. Paul, Somayeh Pasebani. Thermal stability of additively manufactured austenitic 304L ODS alloy[J]. J. Mater. Sci. Technol., 2021, 83: 208-218.

Figures/Tables 17

Table 1 The chemical composition of 304L powder according to Sandvik’s datasheet (wt.%).

Fe	Ni	Cr	C	Si	Mn	P	S	N
Bal	10.060	18.853	0.017	0.720	1.3	0.012	0.005	0.083

Fig. 1. (a) Evacuated quartz tube with LPBF 304L ODS sample and Zr (as oxygen getter) for thermal stability aging treatment, (b) high-temperature tensile specimens, and (c) cylindrical creep specimens were machined out of manufactured blocks.

Fig. 2. XRD patterns of as-built LPBF 304 ODS alloy and aged at 1000, 1100, and 1200 °C.

Fig. 3. SEM micrographs from the cross-section perpendicular to the build direction of (a) as-built LPBF 304L ODS alloy and (b) aged LPBF 304L ODS at 1200 °C for 100 h.

Fig. 4. HAADF (Z-contrast) STEM micrograph with corresponding EDS elemental maps (arrows point at Y-Si-O-enriched nanoparticles, and dashed circles present pores in the matrix) in (a) as-built LPBF 304L ODS alloy, and (b) aged LPBF 304L ODS alloy at 1200 °C for 100 h.

Table 2 EDS chemical analysis of precipitated nanoparticles enriched in Y-Si-O (wt.%).

Elements	Fe	Cr	Ni	Mn	Si	Y	O
Nanoparticles of as-built LPBF 304L ODS alloy (wt.%)	41.27 ± 8.2	13.59 ± 3.4	6.47 ± 1.5	1.59 ± 0.1	2.59 ± 0.4	12.77 ± 2.4	21.73 ± 5.2
Nanoparticles of aged LPBF 304L ODS alloy at 1200 °C for 100 h (wt.%)	56.69 ± 6.3	16.54 ± 2.6	7.3 ± 2.2	1.17 ± 0.2	0.18 ± 0.03	17.32 ± 2.9	0.79 ± 0.08

Fig. 5. Bright-field STEM micrographs (a), (c) as-built LPBF 304L ODS alloy (b), (d) aged LPBF 304L ODS alloy at 1200 °C for 100 h, arrows pointing at oxide nanoparticles.

Fig. 6. Histogram of the oxide nanoparticle size distribution of LPBF 304L ODS alloy (a) as-built and after aging at (b) 1000 °C, (c) 1100 °C, and 1200 °C for 100 h.

Fig. 7. IPF maps and corresponding grain misorientation angle in LPBF 304L ODS alloy (a) as-built and after aging at (b) 1000 °C, (c) 1100 °C and (d) 1200 °C for 100 h; grain tolerance angle was set at 5° and misorientation angle above 10° considered to be high angle grain boundaries (HAGB).

Table 3 Grain size measurement in LPBF 304L ODS as-built, and aged at 1000, 1100, and 1200 °C using EBSD micrographs shown in Fig. 7(a)-(d).

Samples	As-built	Aged at 1000 °C	Aged at 1100 °C	Aged at 1200 °C
Average grain size (μm)	7.7 ± 6.7	8.3 ± 6.1	8.2 ± 5.8	9.1 ± 7.2

Fig. 8. High-temperature tensile properties of the LPBF 304L ODS alloy at different temperatures: (a) YS and UTS values, and (b) total percentage elongation to fracture.

Table 4 Tensile properties of LPBF 304L ODS alloy at room temperature, 400 °C, 500 °C, 600 °C, 700 °C and 800 °C.

Tensile properties	RT	400 °C	500 °C	600 °C	700 °C	800 °C
YS (MPa)	575 ± 8	345 ± 6	319 ± 4	290 ± 2	217 ± 1	145 ± 5
UTS (MPa)	700 ± 13	411 ± 1	390 ± 2	370 ± 4	229 ± 1	152 ± 6
Elongation (%)	32 ± 5	23.5 ± 2	23 ± 2	23 ± 1	21.5 ± 1	18.5 ± 1

Table 5 A comparison of YS and UTS values of LPBF 304L ODS alloy with annealed 304 and conventionally manufactured austenitic and ferritic ODS alloys.

Material	YS at RT	UTS at RT	YS at 600 °C	UTS at 600 °C	YS at 700 °C	UTS at 700 °C	YS at 800 °C	UTS at 800 °C
LPBF 304L ODS (present study)	575	700	290	370	217	229	145	152
Annealed 304 [39]	290	579	113	367	95	241	68	124
HIP 310 ODS [50]	526	904	—	—	—	350	—	—
HIP 304 ODS [28]	525	940	—	—	—	415	—	—
HIP 304 ODS [30]	—	775	—	410	—	300	—	—
HIP 316 L ODS [51]	370	670	—	—	220	270	—	—
HIP Fe16Cr3Al ODS [22]	750	850	269	350	—	—	80	85
SPS Fe14Cr ODS [17]	620	760	300	350	220	300	—	—
PM2000 ODS [52]	850	880	420	450	—	—	180	200

Fig. 9. Microhardness values of LPBF 304L ODS alloy before and after aging for 100 h.

Fig. 10. Creep curves of LPBF 304L ODS alloy for applied stress of 70, 85, and 100 MPa at 700 °C.

Table 6 Creep-rupture times under applied stress of 70, 85, and 100 MPa at 700 °C.

Stress (MPa)	Rupture Time (h)
70	1,471.3
85	577.5
100	153.2

Fig. 11. The variation of (a) steady-state creep rate versus stress at 700 °C as double logarithmic plots and (b) steady-state creep rate versus normalized stress (creep stress/YS at 700 °C) for LPBF 304L ODS alloy (present study) and comparison with 304 SS creep data taken from the work of Phaniraj et al. [56].

References 58

[1]	K. Saeidi, X. Gao, Y. Zhong, Z.J. Shen, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 625 (2015) 221-229. DOI URL
[2]	S. Mirzababaei, S. Pasebani, J. Manuf. Mater. Proc. 3 (2019) 82.
[3]	N. Travitzky, A. Bonet, B. Dermeik, T. Fey, I. Filbert-Demut, L. Schlier, T. Schlordt, P. Greil, Adv. Eng. Mater. 16 (2014) 729-754. DOI URL
[4]	M. Marandi, J. Tarbutton, Proc. Manuf. 34 (2019) 666-671.
[5]	K.S. Baghbaderani, M. Nematollahi, P. Bayatimalayeri, H. Dabbaghi, A. Jahadakbar, M. Elahinia, arXiv preprint arXiv 2006 (2020) 15659.
[6]	A.S. Raman, K.R. Haapala, K. Raouﬁ, B.S. Linke, W.Z. Bernstein, K.C. Morris, Smart Sustain. Manuf. Syst. 2 (2020) 1-24.
[7]	S. Mirzababaei, B.K. Paul, S. Pasebani, JOM 72 (2020) 3070-3079. DOI URL
[8]	M. Katancik, S. Mirzababaei, M. Ghayoor, S. Pasebani, J. Alloys. Compd. 849 (2020), 156319. DOI URL
[9]	X. Li, C. Kang, H. Huang, L. Zhang, T.B. Sercombe, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 606 (2014) 370-379. DOI URL
[10]	M. Nematollahi, G. Toker, S. Saghaian, J. Salazar, M. Mahtabi, O. Benafan, H. Karaca, M. Elahinia, Shape Mem. Superelasticity 5 (2019) 113-124.
[11]	S. Pasebani, M. Ghayoor, S. Badwe, H. Irrinki, S.V. Atre, Addit. Manufact. 22 (2018) 127-137.
[12]	H. Dabbaghi, K. Safaei, M. Nematollahi, P. Bayati, M. Elahinia, Materials 13 (2020) 2104. DOI URL
[13]	M. Ghayoor, S.B. Badwe, H. Irrinki, S.V. Atre, S. Pasebani, Mater. Sci. Forum 941 (2018) 698-703. DOI URL
[14]	G.R. Odette, M.J. Alinger, B.D. Ann, Rev. Mater. Res. 38 (2008) 471-503. DOI URL
[15]	H. Oka, M. Watanabe, S. Ohnuki, N. Hashimoto, S. Yamashita, S. Ohtsuka, J. Nucl. Mater. 447 (2014) 248-253. DOI URL
[16]	Y. Miao, K. Mo, B. Cui, W.-Y. Chen, M.K. Miller, K.A. Powers, V. McCreary, D. Gross, J. Almer, I.M. Robertson, J.F. Stubbins, Mater. Charact. 101 (2015) 136-143. DOI URL
[17]	M.A. Auger, V. De Castro, T. Leguey, A. Mu˜noz, R. Pareja, J. Nucl. Mater. 436 (2013) 68-75. DOI URL
[18]	X. Yan, X. Zhang, F. Wang, T. Stockdale, Y. Dzenis, M. Nastasi, B. Cui, JOM 71 (2019) 2856-2867. DOI URL
[19]	G. Schaffer, M. Loretto, R. Smallman, J. Brooks, Acta Metall. 37 (1989) 2551-2558. DOI URL
[20]	P. Krautwasser, A. Czyrska-Filemonowicz, M. Widera, F. Carsughi, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 177 (1994) 199-208. DOI URL
[21]	S. Dryepondt, K.A. Unocic, D.T. Hoelzer, C.P. Massey, B.A. Pint, J. Nucl. Mater. 501 (2018) 59-71. DOI URL
[22]	H. Dong, L. Yu, Y. Liu, C. Liu, H. Li, J. Wu, Fusion Eng. Des. 125 (2017) 402-406. DOI URL
[23]	Z. Oksiuta, M. Lewandowska, K.J. Kurzydłowski, Mech. Mater. 67 (2013) 15-24. DOI URL
[24]	X. Mao, T.K. Kim, S.S. Kim, K.H. Oh, J. Jang, J. Nucl. Mater. 428 (2012) 82-89. DOI URL
[25]	N. Cunningham, Y. Wu, D. Klingensmith, G.R. Odette, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 613 (2014) 296-305. DOI URL
[26]	L. Raman, K. Gothandapani, B.S. Murty, Def. Sci. J. 66 (2016) 316-322. DOI URL
[27]	D. Morrall, J. Gao, Z. Zhang, K. Yabuuchi, A. Kimura, T. Ishizaki, Y. Maruno, Nucl. Mater. Energy 15 (2018) 92-96.
[28]	M. Wang, Z. Zhou, H. Sun, H. Hu, S. Li, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 559 (2013) 287-292. DOI URL
[29]	Z. Zhou, S. Yang, W. Chen, L. Liao, Y. Xu, J. Nucl. Mater. 428 (2012) 31-34. DOI URL
[30]	Y. Xu, Z. Zhou, M. Li, P. He, J. Nucl. Mater. 417 (2011) 283-285. DOI URL
[31]	T. Boegelein, S.N. Dryepondt, A. Pandey, K. Dawson, G.J. Tatlock, Acta Mater. 87 (2015) 201-215. DOI URL
[32]	J.C. Walker, K.M. Berggreen, A.R. Jones, C.J. Sutcliffe, Adv. Eng. Mater. 11 (2009) 541-546. DOI URL
[33]	Y. Shi, Z. Lu, H. Xu, R. Xie, Y. Ren, G. Yang, J. Alloys. Compd. 791 (2019) 121-133. DOI URL
[34]	M. Ghayoor, K. Lee, Y. He, C.-H. Chang, B.K. Paul, S. Pasebani, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 788 (2020), 139532.
[35]	M. Ghayoor, K. Lee, Y. He, C.-H. Chang, B.K. Paul, S. Pasebani, Microsc. Microanal. 25 (2019) 2594-2595. DOI URL
[36]	B.K. Paul, K. Lee, Y. He, M. Ghayoor, C.H. Chang, S. Pasebani, CIRP Annals 69 (2020) 193-196. DOI URL
[37]	M. Ghayoor, S. Mirzababaei, K. Lee, Y. He, TX, 2019, pp. 967-976.
[38]	S. Mirzababaei, M. Ghayoor, R.P. Doyle, S. Pasebani, Mater. Lett. 284 (2021), 129046. DOI URL
[39]	A. Iron, S. Institute, High-temperature Characteristics of Stainless Steels, Committee of Stainless Steel Producers, American Iron and Steel Institute, 1979.
[40]	M. Ghayoor, K. Lee, Y. He, C.H. Chang, B.K. Paul, S. Pasebani, Addit. Manuf. 32 (2020), 101011.
[41]	Y.M. Wang, T. Voisin, J.T. McKeown, J. Ye, N.P. Calta, Z. Li, Z. Zeng, Y. Zhang, W. Chen, T.T. Roehling, R.T. Ott, M.K. Santala, P.J. Depond, M.J. Matthews, A.V. Hamza, T. Zhu, Nat. Mater. 17 (2018) 63-71. DOI URL
[42]	R. Magnabosco, Mater. Res. 12 (2009) 321-327. DOI URL
[43]	J. Nelson, D. Riley, Proc. Phys. Soc. Lond. (1945) 160-177.
[44]	H. Sakasegawa, L. Chaffron, F. Legendre, L. Boulanger, T. Cozzika, M. Brocq, Y. de Carlan, J.Nucl. Mater. 384 (2009) 115-118.
[45]	J. Ribis, Y. De Carlan, Acta Mater. 60 (2012) 238-252.
[46]	P.W. Voorhees, J. Stat. Phys. 38 (1985) 231-252. DOI URL
[47]	M. Mujahid, J. Martin, J. Mater. Sci. Lett. 13 (1994) 153-155. DOI URL
[48]	A.P. Jirandehi, M. Mehdizadeh, M. Khonsari, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 176 (2020), 105525. DOI URL
[49]	S. Li, Z. Zhou, P. Wang, H. Sun, M. Wang, G. Zhang, Mater. Des. 90 (2016) 318-329. DOI URL
[50]	M. Wang, Z. Zhou, H. Sun, H. Hu, S. Li, J. Nucl. Mater. 430 (2012) 259-263. DOI URL
[51]	T.-K. Kim, C.-S. Bae, D.-H. Kim, J.-S. Jang, S.-H. Kim, C.-B. Lee, D.-H. Hahn, Nucl. Eng. Technol. 40 (2008) 305-310. DOI URL
[52]	R.L. Klueh, J.P. Shingledecker, R.W. Swindeman, D.T. Hoelzer, J. Nucl. Mater. 341 (2005) 103-114. DOI URL
[53]	P. Koncz, Á. Horváth, K. Balázsi, F.C¸. S¸ ahin, G. Göller, Y. Onüralp, C. Balázsi, Mater. Sci. Forum 729 (2012) 409-414. DOI URL
[54]	S. Pasebani, A.K. Dutt, J. Burns, I. Charit, R.S. Mishra, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 630 (2015) 155-169. DOI URL
[55]	A.K. Mukherjee, J.E. Bird, J.E. Dorn, Experimental Correlations for High-temperature Creep, California, 1968.
[56]	C. Phaniraj, M. Nandagopal, S. Mannan, P. Rodriguez, Acta Metall. Mater. 39 (1991) 1651-1656. DOI URL
[57]	N.E. Dowling, Mechanical Behavior of Materials: Engineering Methods for Deformation, Fracture, and Fatigue, Pearson Education Limited, 2012.
[58]	C. Phaniraj, K. Samuel, S. Mannan, P. Rodriguez, Tokyo, 1986, pp. 205-208.