Different Evolutions of the Microstructure, Texture, and Mechanical Performance During Tension and Compression of 316L Stainless Steel

• Published in: Metallurgical and materials transactions. A, Physical metallurgy and materials science Physical metallurgy and materials science, 2020-07, Vol.51 (7), p.3447-3460
• Main Authors: El-Tahawy, Moustafa, Jenei, Péter, Kolonits, Tamás, Han, Gigap, Park, Hyeji, Choe, Heeman, Gubicza, Jenő
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Austenitic stainless steels; Characterization and Evaluation of Materials; Chemistry and Materials Science; Compressive properties; Dislocation density; Heat treating; Martensite; Materials Science; Mechanical properties; Metallic Materials; Nanotechnology; Phase composition; Room temperature; Stainless steel; Strain hardening; Structural Materials; Surfaces and Interfaces; Texture; Thin Films; True strain; Yield strength
• ISSN: 1073-5623; 1543-1940
• DOI: 10.1007/s11661-020-05782-5

The tensile and compressive behaviors of 316L stainless steel at room temperature were compared. The differences between the stress–strain responses during tension and compression were explained by the different evolutions of the texture, defect structure, and phase composition. It was found that up to true strain of ~ 25 pct the flow stress during tension was only slightly higher (by ~ 40 MPa) than that during compression, which can be explained by the different textures of the two types of specimens. On the other hand, between the strains of 25 and 50 pct, the strain hardening for tension was much higher, which resulted in a ~ 200 MPa larger flow stress in the tensile-tested specimen at 50 pct strain. It was revealed that the higher flow stress in tension was caused by the harder texture, the higher dislocation density, and the larger fraction of martensite phase.