Tensile stress–strain and work hardening behaviour of P9 steel for wrapper application in sodium cooled fast reactors

Comparative tensile flow and work hardening behaviour of thin section and forged thick section 9Cr–1Mo ferritic steel in the framework of Voce equation and Kocks–Mecking approach

“…8) and hr-r and in the variations of work hardening parameters associated with Voce equation (Figs. 9-11) and K-M approach with temperature observed for plate and tubeplate forging are in agreement with those reported for ferritic and austenitic steels [11][12][13][14][15]24].…”

“…It has been suggested that there is no reason for the absence of stage-II, but it may not be experimentally realised in the polycrystalline metals and alloys [27]. The observed two stage work hardening behaviour for plate and tubeplate forging is consistent with those reported recently for 9%Cr ferritic steels [24,28]. Further, distinct three temperature regimes in r-e (Fig.…”

“…Recent investigation on P9 steel for wrapper applications in future sodium cooled fast reactors has demonstrated that a combination of Ludwigson and Hollomon equations provide the best description of tensile r-e behaviour with the lowest v 2 values [24]. Alternately, Voce equation as a single relationship can describe tensile flow behaviour with marginally higher v 2 values in the range of temperatures of interest for useful engineering applications [15,24]. v 2 values less than 10 obtained for both plate and tubeplate forging in the range 300-873 K ( Table 2) (Fig.…”

Plastic flow behavior and its relationship to tensile mechanical properties of high nitrogen nickel-free austenitic stainless steel

“…Many attempts have been made to analyze plastic flow behavior of austenitic stainless steels based on the Ludwigson equation [15,[17][18][19]22,[23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34]. In these analyses, the effects of various factors such as microstructures (e.g.…”

“…contents of carbon, nitrogen and allying elements [19,22,23,28]) and experimental conditions (e.g. test temperature [15,27,29,[31][32][33], loading strain rate [34]) on the plastic flow behavior were studied and the corresponding mechanisms were explained based on the n 1 , n 2 and ε L values obtained. However, it is noted from these analyses that although the qualitative connections of n 1 , n 2 and ε L with microstructure, chemical compositions and experimental conditions were given, the quantitative relations of the resultant strength and ductility to n 1 and n 2 were not involved.…”