2015
DOI: 10.1088/1757-899x/84/1/012049
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impacts of Interface Energies and Transformation Strain from BCC to FCC on Massive-like δ-γ Transformation in Steel

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Here, T m is melting temperature. Atomistic simulations that were performed by the embedded atom method gave γ grain boundary energy ranges from 0 to 0.4 J m −2 , depending on the degree of misorientation 27 . The phase field model gave an average γ grain boundary energy of 0.37 J m −2 28 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here, T m is melting temperature. Atomistic simulations that were performed by the embedded atom method gave γ grain boundary energy ranges from 0 to 0.4 J m −2 , depending on the degree of misorientation 27 . The phase field model gave an average γ grain boundary energy of 0.37 J m −2 28 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…14) In addition, nucleation of γ phase in δ phase, which is a key issue to understand the massive-like transformation, was also examined by considering interfacial energy and strain induced by the δ -γ transformation with atomistic model and phase field model. [15][16][17] As far as the observations of solidification in Fe-C alloys are concerned, the massive-like transformation is a preferred transformation mode for the undercooled δ phase in carbon steel. The massive-like transformation 12,13) was characterized by following points:…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The sequence of nucleation and growth has been explained by considering the relationship of interfacial energies. [18][19][20] In our previous observations, 15,16) δ dendrites grew in advance and nucleation of the γ phase hardly occurred even at temperatures below the peritectic temperature when the specimens which had dimensions of 5-10 mm width and 0.1 mm thickness was cooled. As a result, the δ phase was undercooled below the peritectic temperature.…”
Section: Time-resolved and In-situ Observation Of δ -γ Transformationmentioning
confidence: 78%