0
Research Papers: Materials and Fabrication

Microstructural Modeling of P91 Martensitic Steel Under Uniaxial Loading Conditions

[+] Author and Article Information
B. J. Golden

Department of Mechanical, Aeronautical
and Biomedical Engineering,
Materials and Surface Science Institute,
University of Limerick,
Limerick, Ireland
e-mail: Brian.Golden@ul.ie

D. F. Li

Department of Mechanical, Aeronautical
and Biomedical Engineering,
Materials and Surface Science Institute,
University of Limerick,
Limerick, Ireland
e-mail: Dongfeng.Li@ul.ie

N. P. O'Dowd

Department of Mechanical, Aeronautical
and Biomedical Engineering,
Materials and Surface Science Institute,
University of Limerick,
Limerick, Ireland
e-mail: Noel.ODowd@ul.ie

P. Tiernan

Department of Design and
Manufacturing Technology,
Materials and Surface Science Institute,
University of Limerick,
Limerick, Ireland
e-mail: Peter.Tiernan@ul.ie

Contributed by the Pressure Vessel and Piping Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF PRESSURE VESSEL TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received July 2, 2013; final manuscript received November 5, 2013; published online January 8, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Marina Ruggles-Wrenn.

J. Pressure Vessel Technol 136(2), 021404 (Jan 08, 2014) (6 pages) Paper No: PVT-13-1105; doi: 10.1115/1.4026028 History: Received July 02, 2013; Revised November 05, 2013

The changing face of power generation and the increasingly severe conditions experienced by power plant materials require an improved understanding of the deformation and failure response of power plant materials. Important insights can be obtained through computational studies, where the material microstructure is explicitly modeled. In such models, the physical mechanisms of deformation and damage can be represented at the microscale, providing a more accurate prediction of material performance. In this paper, two approaches are examined to represent the microstructure of a martensitic power plant steel (P91). In one approach, the model is based on a “measured microstructure” with electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) employed to obtain the orientation of the martensitic grain structure of the steel. The alternative approach is to use a “numerically simulated” model where the microstructure is generated using the Voronoi tessellation method. In both cases, the microstructural model is incorporated within a representative volume element (RVE) in a finite-element analysis. The material constitutive response is represented by a nonlinear, rate dependent, finite strain crystal plasticity model, with the microstructural orientation specified at each finite-element integration point by the microstructural model. The predictions from the two approaches are compared. The stress distributions are observed to be very similar, though some differences are seen in the strain variation within the RVE.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

SEM image of service aged P91 and (a) a packet within the steels microstructure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Generated microstructure model with grains obtained using Voronoi tessellation

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Euler angle information obtained from electron backscatter diffraction

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Global stress versus strain graph of the two RVE models under 10% uniaxial loading

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Normal stress distribution in the MM model at 10% uniaxial loading

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Normal stress distribution in the GM model at 10% uniaxial loading

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Histogram of the stress distribution in the MM model at 10% strain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Histogram of the stress distribution in the GM model at 10% strain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Accumulated equivalent plastic strain distribution in MM model at 10% uniaxial loading

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Accumulated equivalent plastic strain distribution in GM model at 10% uniaxial loading

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Histogram of the accumulated equivalent plastic strain in the MM model at 10% strain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Histogram of the accumulated equivalent plastic strain in the GM model at 10% strain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Macroscopic experimental stress–strain data fitted with constitutive law

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

A cumulative distribution function showing the FEA results compared with model fit at 10% macroscopic strain

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In