Quench & Partitioning (QP) steels: Nanostructure and Atom Probe Tomography
Quench & Partitioning (QP) steels are characterized by an excellent balance of high tensile strength and good elongation with similar chemical compositions as
conventional TRIP steels. They are produced via the Q&P process which consists of a quenching and a partitioning step. In the quenching step, fully austenitized or
intercritically annealed steels are quenched to temperatures (referred to as the “quench temperature”) below the martensite start (Ms) temperature but above the martensite finish (Mf) temperature in
order to form a controlled volume fraction of martensite. The quenched steels are then held at the same or higher temperatures than the quench temperature during the subsequent partitioning
step. Austenite that prevails after quenching is considered to be stabilized through carbon partitioning from martensite into the
austenite during the partitioning treatment. The resultant microstructures of the steels mainly consist of tempered martensite and retained austenite so that a higher strength can be achieved as
compared to conventional TRIP steels.
Carbon partitioning between ferritic and austenitic phases is essential for all austenite stabilization phenomena in most advanced steels such as those encountered in the Q&P process. The atomistic analysis of carbon partitioning in Q&P alloys is, however, challenging owing to the overlap of several competing phenomena during the partitioning step. It has been suggested that the carbon partitioning from martensite into austenite is controlled by the constrained carbon equilibrium (CCE) criterion. This criterion aims at predicting the carbon concentration in austenite under the condition that
(1) an identical carbon chemical potential exists in both ferrite (or martensite) and austenite;
(2) the atomic balancing proceeds under the assumption that the interface between ferrite and austenite does not migrate.
Therefore, this model does not account for the volume expansion frequently observed during the partitioning step. Possible reasons to explain the volume expansion are the bainite transformation or the migration of martensite/austenite interface, in cases where the partitioning temperature is above the Ms temperature. The bainite transformation can also contribute to carbon enrichment into the remaining austenite if carbide precipitation is suppressed, for example, through the addition of Si. The migration of the martensite/austenite interface should also have some influence on carbon enrichment into austenite. Therefore, it is essential to separate the contributions to the carbon enrichment into austenite during the Q&P heat treatment caused by the carbon partitioning from martensite from that caused by the other possible mechanisms mentioned above.
Acta Materialia 65 (2014) 215-228
Yuki Toji, Hiroshi Matsuda, Michael Herbig, Pyuck-Pa Choi, Dierk Raabe
Atomic-scale analysis of carbon partitioning between martensite and austenite by atom probe tomography and correlative transmission electron microscopy
Acta Materialia 65 (2014) 215 carbon par[...]
PDF-Dokument [1.7 MB]
Carbon partitioning between ferritic and austenitic phases is essential for austenite stabilization in the most advanced steels such as those produced by the quenching and partitioning
(Q&P) process. The atomistic analysis of the carbon partitioning in Q&P alloys is, however, difficult owing to the simultaneous occurrence of bainite transformation, which can also
contribute to carbon enrichment into remaining austenite and hence overlap with the carbon partitioning from martensite into austenite. Therefore, we provide here a direct
atomic-scale evidence of carbon partitioning from martensite into austenite without the presence of bainite transformation. Carbon partitioning is investigated by means of atom probe tomography and correlative transmission electron microscopy. A model steel (Fe–0.59 wt.% C (2.7 at.% C)–2.0 wt.% Si–2.9 wt.% Mn) with martensite finish temperature below room temperature was designed and used in order to clearly separate the carbon partitioning between martensite and austenite from the bainite transformation. The steel was
austenitized at 900 °C, then water-quenched and tempered at 400 °C. Approximately 8 vol.% retained austenite existed in the as-quenched state. We confirmed by X-ray diffraction and dilatometry that austenite decomposition via bainite transformation did not occur during tempering. No carbon enrichment in austenite was observed in the as-quenched specimen. On the other hand, clear carbon enrichment in austenite was observed in the 400 °C tempered specimens with a carbon concentration inside the austenite of 5–8 at.%. The results hence quantitatively revealed carbon partitioning from martensite to austenite, excluding bainite transformation during the Q&P heat treatment.
Yuki Toji, Goro Miyamoto and Dierk Raabe
Acta Materialia 86 (2015) 137-147
Carbon partitioning during quenching and partitioning heat treatment accompanied by carbide precipitation
Acta Materialia 86 (2015) 137 Toji carbo[...]
PDF-Dokument [1.8 MB]
Carbon partitioning from martensite into austenite in the quenching and partitioning (Q&P) process has been suggested to be controlled by the constrained carbon equilibrium (CCE) criterion. It defines an approach for predicting the carbon concentration in austenite under the condition that competing reactions such as carbide formation and bainite transformation are suppressed. Carbide precipitation in martensite is, however, often observed during the partitioning step, even in low-carbon steels as well as in high-carbon steels, even when containing a high amount of Si. Therefore, carbon partitioning from martensite into austenite is studied here, considering carbide precipitation in martensite. Carbon partitioning was investigated by means of a field-emission electron probe micro analysis (FE-EPMA) and atom probe tomography (APT), using 1.07 wt.% and 0.59 wt.% carbon steels with various martensite volume fractions. Carbon partitioning from martensite to austenite was clearly observed in all specimens, even though a considerable amount of carbide precipitated inside the martensite. The austenite carbon concentration after the partitioning step was not influenced by either the martensite volume fraction or the bulk carbon content. A modified model for predicting the austenite carbon concentration after the partitioning step was proposed to explain the experimental results by assuming carbon equilibria between austenite, ferrite and cementite under a constrained condition.