دانلود ترجمه مقاله بررسی میکرو ساختار در جوش های غیر همجنس بین فولادهای زنگ نزن مارتنزیتی و آستنیتی – مجله الزویر

• فهرست مطالب:

چكيده
۱ مقدمه
۲ رويۀ آزمايشي
۱ ۲ مواد و رويۀ جوشكاري
۲ ۲ خواص مكانيكي
۳ ۲ استحكام در برابر خوردگی متخلخل
۴ ۲ شاخصه بندي و پش بيني ريزساختار جوش
۳ نتايج
۳ ۱ خواص مكانيكي
۳ ۱ ۱ استقامت كششي
۳ ۱ ۲ چغرمگي ضربه ايي فلز جوش
۳ ۱ ۳ نتايج سختي
۲ ۳ آزمون خوردگي تخلخل
۴ بحث
۱ ۴ تكامل ريزساختار
۲ ۴ رفتار چغرمگي و استحكام كششي جوشكاري
۳ ۴ اندازه گيري سختي
۴ ۴ آزمون خوردگي تخلخل
۵ نتيجه گيري

• بخشی از ترجمه:

براساس كارهاي تحقيقاتي كه در اين مقاله به آنها پرداخته شد، نتايج زير استنباط ميشود:
۱٫ نتايج اين بررس نشان داده است كه فولاد ضدزنگ آستنيتي را مي توان با استفاده از E2209-17 دولايه و E308L-16 مادۀ پركنندۀ آستنيتي به فولاد ضد زنگ مارتنزيتي جوش داد. از ديدگاه رويه ايي، رفتار پيش گرمايي قبل از جوشكاري تركيبات مشابه بااستفاده از قابل مصرف جوشكاري نيز لازم است.
۲٫ استحكام كششي جوشكاري،كه توسط الكترود دولايه (E2209-17) توليد شد،تا حدودي كمتر ازاستحكام كشش الكترود آستنيتي (E308L-16) بود. بااينحال، هر دو جوشكاري غيرمشابه داراي استحكام مفصل قابل قبول بودند.
۳٫ ريزساختار در هر دو جوش ساخته شده با الكترود آستنيتي E308L-16 و دولايۀ E2209-17 در امتداد مرز فيوژن فلز جوش/ X20CrMo13به دليل تابكاري و سپس سرعت سرمايشي بالا افزايش يافت.
۴٫ چغرمگي ضربه ايي هر دو رسوب E2209-17 و E308L-16 حتي در دماي كم و. صرفنظر از درونداد حرارت قابل قبول بود.نمونه آزمون ارائه شده با كل دماي آزمون رفتار شكست نرم به دليل جغرمگي ضربه ايي زياد فولاد ضدزنگ رانشان مدهد.
۵٫ با وجود اينكه مقاومت در برابر خوردگي كل فلز جوش و جوشكاري كه با فلز پركنندۀ E308L-16 نسبتا بهتراز جوش ساخته شده با فلز پركنندۀ E2209-17 به دليل سطح زياد آستنيت بدست آمد و رسوب گذاري نيتريت سديم كاهش يافت، اما در نتيجه مقاومت در برابر خوردگي تخلخل فلز پركننده قابل قبول بود.

۶٫ ريزساختار جوشكاري از نمودار WRC اصلاح شدۀ Kotecki كه مرز مارتنزتي و آستنتي رانشان مي دهد حمايت ميكند.
۷٫ مرزها دانه ايي نوع ۲ در مرزهاي فيوژن E308L-16/XCr20-Mo13 بر خلاف منطقۀ فيوژن E2209-17/XCr20Mo13 رخ مي دهند.

• بخشی از مقاله انگلیسی:

Introduction Because of their acceptable corrosion resistance, good mechanical properties and becoming economic, martensitic stainless steel has become increasingly attractive to a number of industry sectors. Austenitic stainless steel has been widely preferred by industry due to its good mechanical properties, outstanding corrosion resistance in a wide range of environment and good weldability. Each type of those grades of stainless steel is welded similarly by using fusion welding technique with or without requirement of special technique. However, there is limited information about microstructure/ property relationships in dissimilar welds between austenitic and martensitic stainless steel by using duplex and austenitic stainless steel electrode. Increasing application of these steels will require a better understanding of the issues associated with welds to dissimilar metals. The joining of dissimilar materials is generally more challenging than that of similar materials because of differences in the physical, chemical and mechanical properties of the base metals welded. These differences may also complicate the selection of filler metals compatible to both base metals [1]. Therefore, filler metal selection is often compromised between the two dissimilar metals. There are few constitution diagrams such as Schaeffler [2], Delong [3] and WRC [4], for similar and dissimilar metal joining and predicting the microstructure. However, most of the diagrams currently available do not represent the constitution regime for ferritic and martensitic stainless steel which has the ferrite plus martensite region. Since the WRC-1992 [4] diagram is recommended for ferrite prediction, it is rather awkward to still rely on the Schaeffler diagram for martensite prediction; Schaeffler diagram does not accurately predict microstructure. Therefore, a study was carried out by Kotecki [5] who has investigated the effect of the higher manganese content of the weld filler metal on the constitution regime on diagram. To do this, by plotting the Cr- and Ni-equivalents for the materials on the diagram and connecting the base metals by a tie line, the microstructure can be estimated by connecting a point along that tie line (selected as the midpoint) to a tie line to the filler metal composition. The weld metal constitution then lies along the line between the filler metal and base metal midpoint as dictated by the level of dilution. The dissimilar materials selected for the overall study included an X20CrMo13 grade martensitic stainless steel and X5CrNi18-10 grade austenitic stainless steel. Both austenitic and duplex stainless steel manual metal arc welding electrodes were used to join this combination using multipass manual metal arc welding process. Thus, microstructure/property relationships between austenitic and martensitic stainless steel dissimilar welds were determined in this study. To do this, relationship between hardness, pitting corrosion resistance and % ferrite content related with the weld layer in all weld metal and weldment was investigated. The relationships between microstructure and mechanical properties were also evaluated in detail. 2. Experimental procedure 2.1. Materials and welding procedure Welding assembly was prepared for dissimilar welds between austenitic stainless steel (X5CrNi18-10) to martensitic stainless steel (X20CrMo13). Both E2209-17 duplex and E308L-16 austenitic welding consumable were selected to join these metals. The chemical composition for the base and consumable was listed in Table 1. The base materials were supplied in the form of 10- mm plate. These plates were cut into 50
۱۵۰ mm coupons with a 35 level of each plate to provide 70 groove angle for a single-V-groove butt joint configuration. The root face was 1 mm with root opening of 2.5 mm. All welding was performed using the manual metal arc welding process with 3.2-mm diameter welding electrode. E2209-17 and E308L-16 welding consumable were used in the multipass welds to join X20CrMo13 grade martensitic stainless steel to X10CrNi18-10 grade austenitic stainless steel. The welding parameters were used by the suggestion of welding consumable producer. Due to different thermal conductivity between austenitic and martensitic stainless steel, test samples were preheat treated at 200 C. Test samples were joined initially in the root and then second followed cover pass by, respectively. 2

دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی

خرید ترجمه فارسی مقاله