Comparison of Dilatometry Results Obtained by Two Different Devices when Generating CCT and <i>In Situ</i> Diagrams

Abstract

For understanding and describing the materials behaviour during phase transformations, dilatometer measurements are commonly used in the scientific community. Generally, standard CCT diagrams are generated by means of dilatometer experiments. However, in many cases, real weld cycles are more suitable for studying the materials behaviour instead of using CCT diagrams. In this regard we talk about so-called in-situ diagrams.In this work, two different devices have been used to obtain CCT as well as in-situ diagrams of a low alloyed steel 10GN2MFA. The goal was to compare the results obtained on the one hand by using a widely used standard dilatometer (Bähr DIL-805A/D) and on the other hand by the usage of a thermomechanical simulator called Gleeble®3800. The paper should finally show advantages as well as disadvantages of using different devices and to keep in mind that the optimal measurement method depends on different parameters. Realized experiments also have revealed the range of operational and diagnostic potential of used devices.

Determination of CCT Diagram by Dilatometry Analysis of High-Strength Low-Alloy S960MC Steel

“…For determining transformation temperatures, the three tangent method and the first derivative method were used. Both methods were used in several other studies and show good agreement of results [36,[40][41][42][43].…”

The Selection of Appropriate Process Parameters of Diffusion Bonding in Heterogeneous Weld of 355J2/AISI 316L Steels

“…Due to these reasons, the thermal degradation does not occur in the full length of sample but only in the contact surface and its closest area when exposition temperature, nevertheless, usually does not overpass the value of 0.85 multiple of melting temperature. The heat which is created in the sample can be expressed by the Joule's law [6].…”