Creep behavior of 316 L stainless steel manufactured by laser powder bed fusion
Introduction
Type 316 austenitic stainless steel has been widely used in various types of nuclear reactors, including current nuclear power plants and next-generation advanced reactor concepts, e.g. sodium-cooled fast reactors, molten-salt reactors, and gas-cooled high temperature reactors. Additive manufacturing as a disruptive manufacturing technology has opened up unprecedented opportunities for designing components with controlled microstructure, enabling smart designs of reactor components with complex geometries, design freedom and possibly enhanced properties [1]. Previous studies have shown that additively-manufactured 316 stainless steel (AM 316 SS) has significantly improved low-temperature tensile strength and good ductility over conventionally-made wrought 316 SS [2], [3], [4]. The high-temperature mechanical performance of AM 316 SS is yet to be evaluated and fully understood. A comprehensive database of elevated temperature mechanical properties is needed for its structural applications in the Transformational Challenge Reactor (TCR), a gas-cooled microreactor being developed to demonstrate revolutionary technologies including additive manufacturing [5,6].
Laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) is an additive manufacturing technology whereby laser beams are used to melt and consolidate metal powder lay-by-layer to form parts. It can fabricate complex components with high accuracy that is difficult to achieve by conventional manufacturing techniques, e.g. casting and forging. This new manufacturing technology has seen broad applications in a wide range of industries [7]. Today, austenitic stainless steels are routinely processed by LPBF [8]. The microstructure of LPBF-produced 316 SS is, however, much more complex than that of conventionally-made 316 SS. Various types of defects can be produced during the printing process, such as pores, cracks, etc. [8]. The high-energy input, rapid melting and solidification process result in a highly non-equilibrium microstructure. As has been observed previously, the microstructure of AM 316 L SS has a hierarchical microstructure with length scales spanning several orders of magnitude [3]. A melt pool contains columnar grains within which subgranular cellular structure prevails [9], [10], [11], [12]. Solidification cells have diameters of 1 µm or less and have similar crystallographic orientation. Cell walls contain high density dislocations and are segregated with chromium and molybdenum. The cell size is dependent on the thermal gradient and the solidification rate [3,9,12]. Rapid solidification has long been recognized as a useful means of producing dislocation substructures. Formation of dendrites and solute segregation resulting from rapid solidification promote the formation of dislocations [13]. Dislocations form cell structure under thermal stress during rapid solidification and cooling by a knitting process involving stress-induced climb [14,15].
The creep behavior of a material is generally determined by (1) material's intrinsic properties e.g. melting temperature, elastic modulus, diffusivity, (2) microstructural features (e.g. grains, subgrains, dislocations, second-phase precipitates), and (3) operating conditions (temperature, stress, environment). Dislocation substructures (cells, subgrains) play an important role in the creep resistance of a material. It should be noted that “dislocation cells” and “subgrains” have been traditionally used to describe the morphologies of dislocation substructures. Dislocation cells often refer to the dislocation substructure consisting of broad, diffused boundaries containing dislocation tangles, while subgrains refer to substructure with narrow and well defined sub-boundaries having a larger misorientation than cell walls. Sometimes these two terms are used interchangeably. In conventionally-made 316 SS, dislocation substructures are widely observed in creep tests at temperatures > 700 °C [16], [17], [18], [19], [20]. The influence of subgrain size on the creep resistance was also demonstrated by Sherby and Burke [21] who showed that the creep rate of aluminum with a fine subgrain size has higher creep resistance than a material containing coarse subgrains. In AM 316 SS, dislocation cell structure exists before creep tests, and is, in fact, a structural variable for creep. Little information is available in the literature regarding the creep resistance of AM 316 SS and the roles of the unique microstructural features, e.g. dislocation cells, porosity, solute segregation in the creep response of AM 316 SS.
The objective of this study is to evaluate the creep behavior of an LPBF-produced 316 L SS (referred to as “AM 316 L SS” throughout the paper) and to understand the effect of unique microstructural features of AM 316 L SS on its creep resistance. This understanding is vital to the optimization of process parameters and post-built treatments to produce high-quality parts with optimized microstructure and superior properties.
Section snippets
Experimental
The creep specimens used in this study were ASTM-standard round bar specimens fabricated of two builds from printed rods of AM 316 L SS. The rods were printed by an LPBF process using a Concept Laser–M2 printer at Oak Ridge National Laboratory [22]. Praxair 316 L stainless steel power and default printer setting were used for the build. The chemical composition of 316 L feedstock is given in Table 1 [22].
The printed rods had a nominal diameter of 12.5 mm and a nominal length of 100 mm. They
Creep behavior of AM 316 L SS
Fig. 3 shows the creep curves in terms of creep strain as a function of time for AM 316 L SS tested at 550, 600, and 650 °C. The creep rupture data is plotted in Fig. 4 in terms of the creep stress vs. the rupture time. Specimens made by Laser 1 and Laser 2 show comparable creep behavior. The batch variability between laser 1 and laser 2 is insignificant in these short-term creep tests. The creep rupture life, tf and the creep stress, σ follows the relationship (as illustrated in Fig. 4):
Creep deformation mechanism in AM 316 L SS
The creep rate of a material can be generally described by the following equation [29]:where A is the constant, D the diffusion coefficient, G the shear modulus, k the Boltzmann constant, T the absolute temperature, b the Burgers vector, σ the stress, and n the stress exponent. The diffusivity and elastic modulus are the two most important factors affecting the creep rate of a material at a given stress [30]. The minimum creep rate data in Fig. 6 are replotted in Fig. 12 where the
Conclusions
Creep tests of an additively manufactured 316 L stainless steel (referred to as “AM 316 L SS”) were conducted at temperatures of 550, 600, and 650 °C and stresses between 175 and 300 MPa. Creep specimens were fabricated from rods printed by two lasers by a laser powder bed fusion process. A solution-annealed wrought 316H SS specimen was included to compare with AM 316 L SS. The microstructure of the as-built AM 316 L SS had a columnar grain structure with well-organized dislocation cells of the
Credit author statement
Meimei Li: conceptualization, methodology, data curation and analysis, investigation, writing-original draft; Xuan Zhang: data curation and analysis, investigation, writing-review & editing; Wei-Ying Chen: data curation and analysis, investigation, writing-review & editing; T. S. Byun: project administration, writing-review & editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgment
Work was supported by the Transformational Challenge Reactor Program supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy under Contract DE-AC02-06CH11357. Use of the Center for Nanoscale Materials, an Office of Science user facility, was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357. This research used resources of the Advanced Photon Source, a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of
References (42)
- et al.
Simultaneously enhanced strength and ductility for 3D-printed stainless steel 316 L by selective laser melting
NPG Asia Mater.
(2018) - et al.
Additively manufactured hierarchical stainless steels with high strength and ductility
Nat. Mater.
(2018) - et al.
Structure/property (constitutive and spallation response) of additively manufactured 316 L stainless steel
Acta Mater.
(2017) - et al.
Transformational challenge reactor preconceptual core design studies
Nucl. Eng. Des.
(2020) - et al.
Powder bed fusion process in additive manufacturing: an overview
Mater. Tosay
(2020) - et al.
Steels in additive manufacturing: a review of their microstructure and properties
Mater. Sci. & Eng. A
(2020) - et al.
Hardened austenite steel with columnar sub-grain structure formed by laser melting
Mater. Sci. Eng. A
(2015) - et al.
Microstructural investigation of selective laser melting 316 L stainless steel parts exposed to laser re-melting
Proc. Eng.
(2011) - et al.
Intragranular cellular segregation network structure strengthening 316 L stainless steel prepared by selective laser melting
J. Nucl. Mater.
(2016) - et al.
Intrinsic strain aging, Σ3 boundaries, and origins of cellular substructure in additively manufactured 316L
Add. Manuf.
(2019)