Materials Science and Engineering A 497 (2008) 451461

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Science and Engineering A
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ msea
Splitting in Dual-Phase 590 high strength steel plates
Part I. Mechanisms
Min Yang
a,b
, Yuh J. Chao
b,
, Xiaodong Li
b
, Jinzhu Tan
c,b
a
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250061, PR China
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of South Carolina, 300 Main Street, Columbia, SC 29208, USA
c
College of Mechanical and Power Engineering, Nanjing University of Technology, Nanjing, Jiangsu 210009, PR China
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 13 February 2008
Received in revised form 21 July 2008
Accepted 22 July 2008
Keywords:
Splitting
DP590 steel
Hot-rolled steel
HDGI steel
Charpy V-notch impact
Inclusion
a b s t r a c t
Charpy V-notch impact tests on 5.5mm thick, hot-rolled Dual-Phase 590 (DP590) steel plate were evalu-
ated at temperatures ranging from90

C to 120

C. Similar tests on 2.0mmthick DP590 HDGI steel plate

were also conducted at room temperature. Splitting or secondary cracks was observed on the fractured
surfaces. The mechanisms of the splitting were then investigated. Fracture surfaces were analyzed by
optical microscope (OM) and scanning electron microscope (SEM). Composition of the steel plates was
determined by electron probe microanalysis (EPMA). Micro Vickers hardness of the steel plates was also
surveyed. Results show that splitting occurred on the main fractured surfaces of hot-rolled steel speci-
mens at various testing temperatures. At temperatures above the ductilebrittle-transition-temperature
(DBTT), 95

C, where the fracture is predominantly ductile, the length and amount of splitting decreased
with increasing temperature. At temperatures lower than the DBTT, where the fracture is predominantly
brittle, both the length and width of the splitting are insignicant. Splitting in HDGI steel plates only
appeared in specimens of T-L direction. The analysis revealed that splitting in hot-rolled plate is caused
by silicate and carbide inclusions while splitting in HDGI plate results fromstrip microstructure due to its
high content of manganese and lowcontent of silicon. The micro Vickers hardness of either the inclusions
or the strip microstructures is higher than that of the respective base steel.
2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
Dual-phase steel is a mixture of ferrite matrix and martensite
islands decorating grain boundaries. Some have additions of bai-
nite. The soft phase ferrite provides the ductility while the hard
phase martensite offers the strength. The steel having the com-
bined phases appears to possess superior mechanical properties
over conventional mild steels and high strength low alloy (HSLA)
steels. It therefore has quickly become one of the most popular and
versatile materials in todays automotive industry [14].
To meet different design requirements of individual auto-body
components, a wide variety of DP grades exhibiting different
strength and ductility levels are currently produced by steel indus-
try. Numerous investigations have been performed to study the
mechanical characteristics and microstructures of DP steels [514].
Among these studies, Chao et al. [14] have noticed the splitting in
the fracture surface of Charpy V-notch impact specimens of DP590
steel. Similar studies on pipeline steels, such as X60, X70 and X80

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 803 777 5869; fax: +1 803 777 0106.
E-mail address: chao@sc.edu (Y.J. Chao).
[1520], suggest that splitting on the fracture surface in Charpy
V-notch impact specimens affects the measured fracture tough-
ness and therefore safety evaluation of pipeline steels. Ray et al.
[21] further found that the inclusions and microstructure of HSLAs
inuence their mechanical properties and fracture behavior.
Splitting is a phenomenon in which secondary cracks perpen-
dicular to the main crack and parallel to the plate surface appear in
fracture testing, as shown in Fig. 1. It most occurs in high strength
steels and can show up in either dynamic or static tests. The sec-
ondary cracks can be one or multiple.
Charpy impact tests can reveal a materials capacity in energy
absorption under impact conditions, which is a very important
property for safety assessment in automotive industry. However,
very little has been reported on the mechanisms of splitting and
the potential effect of splitting on the Charpy impact energy of DP
steels. Since splitting was observedinDP590 inCharpy impact tests
(Chao et al. [14]), we further investigated the splitting mechanisms
by studying the inclusions and microstructures of the steel plates.
The results are reported here as Part I. Quantitative analysis of the
fractured surfaces (e.g. the areas of the secondary cracks) and its
effect on the Charpy impact energy is presented in a follow-up
paper, Part II.
0921-5093/$ see front matter 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.msea.2008.07.067
452 M. Yang et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 497 (2008) 451461
Fig. 1. Schematics of splitting on the broken Charpy V-notch (CVN) impact speci-
men: (a) CVNimpact specimen before Charpy test, (b) broken impact specimen, and
(c) splitting at the fracture surface of one piece of the broken specimen.
2. Experimental procedure
Two types of DP590 steel plates were used in this study. One is
a 5mm thick, hot-rolled plate and the other is a 2mm thick, hot
dip galvanized (HDGI) plate. The chemical composition and ten-
sile properties of these two steel plates are listed in Tables 1 and 2
[2224].
The Charpy V-notch impact test samples were cut from a
304.8mm304.8mm5.5mm hot-rolled DP590 plate and a
330mm150mm2mm HDGI DP590 plate in both L-T and T-L
directions, as showninFig. 2. The specimens were preparedaccord-
ing to ASTM Standard E-23, i.e., the in-plane dimensions were
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of the Charpy V-notch Impact test specimens showing
the T-L and L-T direction of the plate.
10mm55mm with a 2mm deep 45

V-notch having a 0.25mm

tip radius in the middle of the specimen. Five samples cut from
the HDGI DP590 steel plate were bond together using QM-50A
adhesives to achieve 10mm thickness for impact testing.
Impact tests were performed using a Tinius Olson pendulum
Charpy impact tester with a maximum capacity of 339J. All HDGI
steel samples were tested at room temperature. The test tempera-
ture of hot-rolled plate samples ranged from120

C to 90

C at an
interval of 10

C. To control the specimen temperature at impact, a

thermocouple was welded onto each specimen near the notch face
using a Hughes 110-V thermocouple capacitor-discharge welder to
monitor the temperature of the testing specimen while in the anvil.
For temperatures below or over room temperature, the specimen
was placed into liquid nitrogen and ethanol mixed liquid or boil-
ing water, respectively, for a period of time to achieve a uniform
temperature in both the inside and the surface of the specimen.
The specimen was then placed in the testing anvil and allowed to
Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of metallographic sample location.
Table 1
Chemical composition of DP590 (wt%)
Material C Mn P S Si Cr Ni Mo+Ti +V Al Fe
Hot-Rolled 0.08 1.24 0.018 0.005 1.14 0.87 0.01 0.043 96.584
HDGI 0.098 1.58 0.015 0.003 0.198 0.281 0.022 0.068 0.057 97.678
Fig. 4. Optical micrographs of DP 590 steel in the middle of the plate: (a) location of micrographs in sample, (b) hot-rolled steel, and (c) HDGI steel.
M. Yang et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 497 (2008) 451461 453
Table 2
Tensile properties of DP590 steels
Material Yield strength (MPa) Ultimate tensile strength (MPa) Total elongation (%)
Hot-rolled 437 621 29.9
HDGI 370 620 25
warm up or cool down to the desired testing temperature. Once
the desired testing temperature was reached from the thermocou-
ple readout, the impact hammer was released and the specimen
was hit and broken. The impact energy was then recorded fromthe
scale on the impact tester in ft-lb.
After the Charpy V-notch impact tests, the fracture surface and
the cross-section of fracture surface of the broken samples in T-L
direction were examined by optical microscope (OM) to investi-
gate the splitting. A scanning electron microscope (SEM) was also
employed to examine the associated fracture modes. The fracture
Fig. 5. Macro fractographs of hot-rolled steel impact specimens at different temperatures and in different directions (a) schematic diagram of sample orientation, (b) T-L
direction, and (c) L-T direction.
454 M. Yang et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 497 (2008) 451461
Fig. 6. Macro fractographs of HDGI steel impact specimens in (a) T-L direction, and
(b) L-T direction.
surfaces of selected T-L specimens were grinded and polished to
investigate the mechanisms of splitting. Selected broken T-L speci-
mens were sectioned parallel to the fracture surface to examine the
microstructure, composition and micro Vickers hardness by OM,
electron probe microanalysis (EPMA) and the micro Vickers hard-
ness tester. All polished specimens were sectioned fromthe broken
Charpy specimens at locations away from the broken surface (see
Fig. 3) and etched with 4% picral reagent.
3. Experimental results
The optical micrographs of DP590 steel plates in the middle
of the plate at a plane perpendicular to the transverse direction
are shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 4(b) shows the microstructure of hot-
rolled steel consisting of banded ferrite (the bright phase) and
martensite (the dark phase) along the rolling direction. Some pre-
cipitates were also distributed in the ferrite. There are also some
inclusions in the middle of the thickness. The strips composed
of bright particle phases, black dots and dark belt are observed
in the middle of the HDGI steel shown in Fig. 4(c). The strip
microstructures are apparently ferrite, martensite and some ne
bainite.
3.1. Macroscale analysis of fracture surface
Fig. 5 shows the macroscopic fractographs of hot-rolled steel
specimens at different temperatures in both T-L and L-T directions.
Apparent splitting can be observed in the fracture surface of spec-
imens in the T-L direction as the test temperature is below 80

C.
Boththe lengthandthe number of splitting decreasedwithincreas-
ing test temperature.
As for the specimens in the L-T direction, splitting gets longer
anddeeper as thetest temperatures varyfrom80

Cto80

C. There
is only short and discontinuous splitting when the test tempera-
ture is below 80

C. More shorter and smaller secondary splits

appear at positions away from the notch tip in both the T-L and
L-T specimens when the test temperature is below 60

C. Due to
ductile deformation, global shrinkage or necking of the specimens
in the thickness direction occurred and this shrinkage gradually
diminished as the test temperature reduces indicating migration
into brittle regime.
Thefracturesurfaceof HDGI steel specimenintheT-L(L-T) direc-
tionis relatively rough(smooth), as showninFig. 6. Nosplitting was
observed from the macro fractographs of the HDGI steel.
Fig. 7 shows the ductilebrittle-transition curve of the CVN
impact energy of hot-rolled steel. According to ASTM-E3, the
ductilebrittle-transition-temperature (DBTT) of this DP590 hot-
rolled steel is determined as 95

C. It appears that, aside from

the difference in rolling direction, specimens with splitting exhibit
higher CVN impact energy in both the upper shelf and lower shelf.
Quantitative analysis of the splitting areas and its relation with the
CVN energy are reported in Part II of the paper.
3.2. Microscale analysis of fracture surface
The SEM micrographs of the fracture surface of hot-rolled steel
T-L impact specimens at 90

C are shown in Fig. 8. Scattered small

cracks canbe found, whichare not obvious inthe macrofractograph
Fig. 7. Effect of splitting on the CVN impact energy of hot-rolled steel; splitting tends to shift the curve upward.
M. Yang et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 497 (2008) 451461 455
Fig. 8. SEM fractographs of hot-rolled steel T-L impact specimens at 90

C; (a) surface prole of the specimen, (b) enlarged region of zone A in (a), and (c) enlarged region of
zone B in (b).
Fig. 9. SEM fractographs of hot-rolled steel T-L impact specimens at 70

C; (a) fracture surface prole of the specimen (arrow indicating the cracking direction of the main
crack), (b) enlarged region of the zone marked by C in (a) which is inside of the splitting, and (c) enlarged region of zone D in (a) showing dimples and the cracking direction.
Fig. 10. SEMfractographs of hot-rolled steel T-L impact specimens at 80

C; (a) surface prole of the specimen, (b) enlarged region of the fracture propagation zone marked
by E in (a), and (c) enlarged region of zone F in (a).
Fig. 11. SEMfractographs of hot-rolled steel T-L impact specimens at 110

C; (a) surface prole of the specimen, (b) enlarged region of the fracture propagation zone marked
by G in (a), and (c) enlarged region of zone H in (a) which is near the tip of the splitting.
456 M. Yang et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 497 (2008) 451461
Fig. 12. Scanning electron fractographs of the HDGI steel specimens: (a) fracture prole of specimen in T-L direction, (b) SEM image of the zone marked by A in (a) showing
small splittings, (c) fracture prole of the specimen in L-T direction, and (d) SEM image of the zone marked by B in (c).
in Fig. 5(b). It appears that the small splittings are due to the strip
microstructure as pointed out by the white arrow in Fig. 8(c). The
presence of small splitting on the fracture surface of DP590 hot-
rolled steel Charpy V-notch impact specimens appears to be at all
testing temperatures. The splitting tends to be small at upper and
lower shelf, but more obvious in the transition-temperature range.
Fig. 9 shows a portion of the fracture surface containing one
splitting from the hot-rolled steel T-L impact specimens at 70

C.
Fig. 13. Microstructure near the splitting of polished fracture surface of hot-rolled steel specimen at 70

C; (a) the tip of the splitting and its location in specimens, (b) the
propagating zone of the splitting showing the inclusions, and (c) one side of the splitting showing the pores.
M. Yang et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 497 (2008) 451461 457
Fig. 14. Microstructure around the splitting of polished fracture surface of the specimen at 70

C; (a) propagating zone of splitting, (b) merge of pores, and (c) the side of
the splitting.
Fig. 15. Macro and micro characteristic of cross-section of hot-rolled DP590 steel Charpy V-notch impact specimen tested at 70

C: (a) schematic diagram of one-half of

the broken specimen and the cut plane, (b) macro-morphology of the cross-section (cut plane) showing several splittings, and (c) enlarged viewfromthe root of the splitting
marked by A in (b).
The fracture surface appearance inside the splitting, see Fig. 9(b),
appears to be cleavage while on the surface of the main crack, see
Fig. 9(c), tobe typical parabolic tearing dimple type ductile fracture.
A very interesting observation from the shape of the dimples is
the tearing direction as pointed by the white arrow in Fig. 9(c).
This tearing or fracture direction suggests that the splitting or
the secondary cracks occurred prior to the propagation of the main
crack and the presence of the secondary cracks possibly reduced
the stress concentration at the main crack tip.
Figs. 10(b) and 11(b) are from the hot-rolled steel T-L test
specimens at 80

C and 110

C, respectively. The fracture appear-

ance appears to be quasi-cleavage and cleavage, respectively,
which reects the gradual reduction of the toughness and ductil-
ity with decreasing temperature. Similar to Fig. 9(b), the fracture
appearance inside the splitting clearly shows the characteristics
of cleavage, as shown in Fig. 10(c). It suggests that the splitting
was resulted frombrittle phases as contrast to ductile dimple, void
growth fracture.
Fig. 12 shows the micrographs of the fracture surface of HDGI
steel specimens. Relatively small splitting marks are apparent in
the T-L samples, as shown in Fig. 12(a) and (b). There are strip
microstructures at the bottomof the splitting. The secondarycracks
in the strip microstructure imply that the strip microstructure is
brittle.
Fig. 12(c) and (d) show the existence of holes around inclusions
on the fracture surface of HDGI L-T samples. No distinct splitting is
present onthefracturesurfaceof theL-Tsamples. It appears that the
obvious strip microstructure is only along the rolling direction of
the plate, and is narrow and discontinuous in the transverse direc-
tion. It is therefore concludedthat the stripmicrostructure, perhaps
originated fromthe fabrication process, contributed to the splitting
[25] in this steel plate.
3.3. Microstructure of polished fracture surface and cross-section
of fracture surface
Fracture surfaces from some broken specimens were polished
to examine the microstructures. Fig. 13 shows the microstructure
around the splitting of a polished fracture surface of the hot-rolled
steel specimen at 70

C. The microstructure near the splitting con-

tains typical texturedcharacteristics. As 4%picral reagent canreveal
the presence of carbides, the bright gray phases in Fig. 13 are ferrite
Table 3
Composition of analyzed points in hot-rolled steel (wt%)
Element 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Ni 0 0.0170 0.0259 0 0 0.0466 0 0.0503 0.0313 0
Mn 1.4469 1.4849 1.4156 1.6157 1.5985 1.5486 1.5970 1.4928 2.2914 1.4368
Cr 0.0711 0.0749 0.0755 0.1182 0.0773 0.0932 0.1353 0.1264 0.1578 0.0872
Fe 97.113 96.742 96.864 96.911 95.344 96.577 94.025 96.915 92.186 97.229
Si 1.2056 1.2399 1.2264 1.2869 1.3700 1.2724 1.5800 1.3284 2.0417 1.2094
C 0.1228 0.4050 0.3491 0 1.5554 0.4226 2.5954 0.0492 3.2577 0
Al 0.0334 0.0363 0.0428 0.0433 0.0331 0.0266 0.0607 0.0335 0.0324 0.0287
458 M. Yang et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 497 (2008) 451461
andthedarkgrayphases aremartensite. Bothferriteandmartensite
distribute as strips parallel to the splitting. The tip of the split-
ting propagated along the martensite, as shown in Fig. 13(a). In
Fig. 13(b), one can see the inclusions inside the splitting as pointed
by the arrows in the gure. Additionally, in Fig. 13(c) there are
deformed pores along the side of the splitting. Evidently, the inclu-
sions fell off from the matrix metal during the impact causing the
splitting to occur.
Fig. 14 shows the microstructure around the splitting of pol-
ished fracture surface of hot-rolled steel specimen at 70

C. There
are manypores alongthe side of splitting. At lower temperature, the
cohesion at inclusion and matrix metal interface is weak and there-
fore is easy to break upon impact. When the pores were deformed
and enlarged by stress, the close-by pores were merged to form
splitting, as shown in Fig. 14(b).
The cross-section view of the splitting in the direction perpen-
dicular to the splitting in hot-rolled steel specimen at 70

C is
showninFig. 15. It canbe seenthat there are manypores aroundthe
roots of the splitting, especially near the tip of the root, indicating
the propagation of the splitting in the depth direction is attributed
tothe linkage of pores. As the pores are formeddue tothe inclusions
during the impact, the postulationthat splitting onthe fracture sur-
face in hot-rolled steel DP590 Charpy V-notch impact specimens
was caused by inclusion is further veried.
3.4. Concentration of alloy elements of DP590 steel
The concentrations of alloy elements of the DP590 hot-rolled
andHDGI steel inthemiddleof thethickness alongtherollingdirec-
tion (as shown in Fig. 4(a)) were surveyed by electron microprobe
analysis. Thealloyelement concentrations of DP590hot-rolledsteel
at points shown in Fig. 16 are listed in Table 3.
In Fig. 16, there is an inclusion (i.e. white dots) lled band in
the middle running from left to right. The points 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6
are located in the martensite and are outside of the band region.
Point 4 is located at the ferrite and is outside of the inclusion band
region. Point 7 is in the martensite inside the inclusion band region.
Point 8 is in the ferrite and is inside the inclusion band region. Point
9 is located inside the inclusion. Point 10 is at the location where
inclusion fell off. By analyzing the data in Table 3, one can conclude
that the white region (i.e. point 9 in Fig. 16) is an inclusion mixed
with silicate and carbide. Obviously, the average concentrations of
carbon and silicon inside the inclusion band region are higher than
those outside of the band region, but other element concentrations
changedverylittle. Inclusioninthis case(seepoint 9inTable3) con-
tains the highest concentration of carbon, silicon, manganese and
chromium. Thecarbonconcentrationof martensiteinsidetheinclu-
sion band zone (see point 7 in Table 3) is much higher than those
outside the inclusion band region. The ferrite inside the band zone
(i.e. point 8 in Table 3) contains a bit more carbon, silicon, nickel
and chromium, but less manganese and aluminum than the ferrite
outside of the inclusion band region. The martensite at point 5 con-
tains highcontent of carbon, andtherefore it is the plate martensite.
Fig. 16. Location of hot-rolled steel EPMA analyzed points.
Fig. 17. Location of HDGI steel EPMA analyzed points.
The concentrations of alloying elements at point 10 are similar to
those of ferrite outside of the inclusion band region.
The concentrations of alloying elements of DP590 HDGI steel at
those points shown in Fig. 17 are also listed in Table 4. The points
inside the ferrite grain, such as points 1, 2 and 7, do not contain car-
bon and alloying element concentrations at these points are lower
than those of other points (i.e. points 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 9 in Fig. 17).
Point 8 is located at the grain boundary of ferrite. It contains a little
carbon and no silicon, nickel and vanadium. The concentrations of
Table 4
Composition of analyzed points in DP590 HDGI steel (wt%)
Element 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
V 0 0 0 0.0029 0.02775 0.00385 0.0359 0 0
Ni 0.02633 0.01857 0 0.0192 0.0258 0.0308 0.0078 0 0.0214
Fe 97.888 97.641 97.137 94.754 95.447 97.486 97.872 97.823 96.951
Mn 1.846 2.08 2.364 2.133 2.142 2.12 1.804 1.8776 2.2985
Cr 0.193 0.2 0.2176 0.198 0.197 0.1723 0.2088 0.2029 0.1937
Si 0 0.0215 0.0136 0.0057 0.0115 0 0.0029 0 0
Al 0.0468 0.0381 0.0379 0.049 0.0335 0.0481 0.068 0.05145 0.0389
C 0 0 0.229 2.8374 2.115 0.1386 0 0.0446 0.4965
M. Yang et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 497 (2008) 451461 459
Fig. 18. Micro hardness of DP590 hot-rolled steel; (a) optical micrograph showing the locations of indentation for hardness measurement; (b) Vickers hardness value at
various points in (a).
Fig. 19. Micro hardness of DP590 HDGI steel: (a) optical micrograph showing the location of the indentation for hardness measurement; (b) Vickers hardness value at points
shown in (a).
other elements at point 8 are similar to those at point 7. Point 3
is located inside the strip microstructure region. It has the highest
content of manganese. Its concentrations of carbon, silicon, alu-
minum and chromium are higher than those of point 8, while the
concentrations of other elements are the same as those of point 8.
Point 9 is also located inside the strip microstructure region, but
the color of its microstructure is darker than that of point 3s. Only
carbon and nickel concentrations at point 9 are higher than that of
points 3. Point 6 is inside the particle microstructure of the strip
microstructure region. No silicon exists at point 6. Compared with
other points inside the strip microstructure region, point 6 con-
tains lowest content of carbonandlower content of manganese and
chromium. Points 4 and 5 are located in the gray microstructure of
the strip microstructure region. They have much higher content
of carbon than all other points. In general, the concentrations of
carbon and manganese inside the strip microstructure are much
higher than those outside of the strip microstructure.
3.5. Micro hardness of DP590 steel
Micro Vickers hardness values across the thickness of the
two steel plates were measured and the results are shown in
Figs. 18 and 19, respectively. As shown in Fig. 18(b), the highest
hardness value is from the inclusion in the middle of the thick-
ness, whereas the lowest value is fromthe ferrite. The difference of
hardness value between the two is 52MHV.
The highest hardness value in DP590 HDGI steel is from the
strip microstructure, and the lowest hardness appears to be located
inside the grain of ferrite, as shown Fig. 19. The difference in
hardness value between strip microstructure and ferrite grain is
156MHV, a value much higher than that in hot-rolled DP590 steel.
4. Discussion
Alloying elements affect the characteristics of microstructure
and consequently the mechanical properties of steels. Silicon and
manganese are main alloying elements in DP590 hot-rolled steel,
while manganese is the predominant alloying element in DP590
HDGI steel.
Manganese is soluble in both austenite and -ferrite, and
strengthens theferriteincarbonsteels bysolidsolutionstrengthen-
ing. Manganeseintheamount of 11.5%is addedindual-phasesteel
to ensure sufcient harden-ability so that martensite is formed
uponrapidcooling[26]. However, accordingtotheFeCMntrinary
alloy phase diagram [27], manganese makes the eutectoid point of
FeC phase diagram move to the lower left. Thereby, manganese
Table 5
Ceq and Pcm of hot-rolled steel at points shown in Fig. 16
Sequence Original 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Ceq 0.5088 0.4284 0.7202 0.6530 0.3465 1.8944 0.7555 2.9544 0.3820 3.7583 0.3073
Pcm 0.2237 0.2389 0.5246 0.4650 0.1296 1.6849 0.5479 2.7346 0.1753 3.4487 0.1165
460 M. Yang et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 497 (2008) 451461
Table 6
Ceq and Pcm of HDGI steel at points shown in Fig. 17
Sequence Original 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Ceq 0.4273 0.348 0.3888 0.667 3.2346 2.5191 0.5292 0.3502 0.3981 0.9198
Pcm 0.204 0.1024 0.115 0.3585 2.9548 2.2355 0.2541 0.1044 0.1486 0.6215
increases the stability of austenite and promotes the precipita-
tion of metallic carbide (Me
3
C). Moreover, manganese enhanced
the strip microstructure in steel [28], and hard phases such as bai-
nite and martensite aggregated in the strip microstructure tend to
embrittle the steel.
Silicon that is an element to promote the formation of ferrite
is added into dual-phase steel to provide solid solution harden-
ing and balance the action of manganese to restrain the presence
of strip microstructure. As stated above that HDGI steel contains
high content of manganese and low content of silicon. Its strip
microstructure is composed of bainite and martensite. On the con-
trary, the hot-rolled steel contains high content of both manganese
and silicon. So, there is no strip microstructure in hot-rolled steel
as in HDGI steel.
Carbon is an important alloying element in steel. While marten-
site in steel contains high content of carbon, it gets hard and brittle.
Therefore, high concentration of carbon results in high strength,
high hardness, and low ductility of steel.
The combined effect of alloying elements can be evaluated by
the carbon equivalent (Ceq) as calculated by [26]
Ceq = C +Mn/6 +Si/24 +Ni/15 +Cr/5 +Mo/4
+Cu/13 +P/2 (1)
The effect of alloying elements onthe propensity of cracking can
be assessed with crack sensitive factor (Pcm) using [26]
Pcm = C +(Mn +Cu +Cr)/20 +Mo/15 +V/10 +Si/30
+Ni/60 +5B (2)
Using the values in Tables 1, 3 and 4, the Ceq and Pcmof the two
steels at the points measured by EPMA are calculated and listed in
Tables 5 and 6.
As shown in Table 5, both the Ceq and the Pcm of the inclusion
(i.e. point 9 in Fig. 16) are the highest in hot-rolled steel. The hard-
ness is the highest as well in the material as shown in Fig. 18(b).
All these indicate that the inclusion in the steel is the most brittle
phase and prone to cracking in the DP590 hot-rolled steel.
However, the Ceq and Pcm of ferrite around the inclusions are
much lower than those at the inclusions, see points 8 and 9 in
Table 5 and Fig. 16. It is relatively soft and could contribute to large
amount of plastic deformation. During impact at high temperature,
the ferrite can absorb most of the impact energy through plastic
deformation, but the inclusions, which are hard, cannot deform
very much. Consequently, de-cohesion happens at the interface
between the inclusion and ferrite (see Fig. 13(c)). As the plastic
deformation of ferrite increases, de-cohesion expands into pores.
Eventually, splitting is formed when the adjacent pores combine
each other becoming crack, as shown in Fig. 8(b) and (c). The cohe-
sion at the ferrite and inclusion interface becomes weaker as the
temperature decreases. It can also be observed in Table 5 that the
Pcmof martensite inside the bandregionof inclusion(i.e. point 7) is
much higher than that of the ferrite in the same region (i.e. point 8).
The microstructure aroundthe splitting of polishedfracture surface
of impact specimen at 70

C (see Fig. 13) indicates that part of the

inclusion fell off from the ferrite to form pores that initiated the
splitting and the splitting then propagated along the martensite
inside the band of the inclusion. The pores at the side of splitting of
specimens at 70

CshowninFigs. 14and15indicate that the inter-

facial bond between inclusion and ferrite gets further weaker. And,
inclusions completely fell off the ferrite to produce pores. These
pores were then extended and combined by the impact stress to
form splitting (or secondary cracks).
Because the Ceq value of the strip microstructure zone in HDGI
steel is highest as listed in Table 6, the hardness of this area is also
highest as shown in Fig. 19(b). Furthermore, because of the amount
of silicon in the material, the lowest hardness of HDGI steel is lower
than that of hot-rolled steel, and the difference in hardness across
the thickness direction in HDGI steel is bigger.
The Pcm of the strip microstructure zone is higher than that
of the base (HDGI or hot-rolled) steel. Consequently, splitting is
easier to initiate and propagate in this zone. This is evidenced from
the experimental results, i.e. both the strip microstructure in the
HDGI steel and the splitting are parallel to the rolling direction. The
hard phases such as bainite and martensite appeared inside the
splitting. Because the thickness of the HDGI steel studied in this
work is relatively thin, the out of plane constraint is small. Then,
splitting is therefore short and shallow. In summary, the splitting
in DP590 HDGI steel is due to the strip microstructure, and its effect
on the impact energy of steel may be ignored.
5. Conclusion
The splitting or secondary cracking phenomenon in Charpy
impact specimens made of DP590 steels in the formof 5.5mmhot-
rolled and 2.0mm HDGI was studied. Conclusions can be drawn as
follows:
(1) Splitting phenomenon exits in hot-rolled steel impact speci-
mens at various testing temperature. In the region when the
temperatureis higher thantheDBTT, longer, narrower andmore
splitting (or secondary cracks) appear with decreasing temper-
ature. As the temperature is lower than the DBTT, sub-splitting
becomes shorter with decreasing temperature.
(2) Splitting in hot-rolled steel occurred due to silicate and carbide
inclusions. During impact, pores rstly formed by de-cohesion
at the interface between ferrite and inclusion, then were
enlarged by the applied impact stress, and nally combined
with each other to initiate the secondary cracks or the splitting.
Subsequently, these splitting propagate along the martensite or
the interface between the inclusion and ferrite.
(3) Splitting in HDGI steel only appears in T-L impact specimen and
is caused by strip microstructure. High content of manganese
and lowcontent of silicon lead to the strip microstructure with
aggregated bainite and martensite in it.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Profs. Zuocheng Wang, Jinqiang
Gao and Shitong Li at Shandong University for their helpful discus-
sion. Financial support to Min Yang fromChina Scholarship Council
and Shandong University is acknowledged.
M. Yang et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 497 (2008) 451461 461
References
[1] http://www.a-sp.org/database/pdf/CarsAsdm/Chapter2/section2-04.pdf.
[2] T. Glandman, The Physical of Micro-alloyed Steels, University Press, Cambridge,
1997.
[3] Prodromos Tsipouridis, Ewald Werner, Christian Krempaszky, Ernst Tragl, Steel
Research International 77 (910) (2006) 654667.
[4] R.O. Rocha, T.M.F. Melo, E.V. Pereloma, D.B. Santos, Materials Science and Engi-
neering A 391 (12) (2005) 296304.
[5] WolfgangBleck, Spyros Papaefthymiou, Andreas Frehn, Proceedings of theSixth
International Conference for Meso-mechanics, 2004, pp. 5461.
[6] T. Alp, A. Wazzan, Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance 11 (4)
(2002) 351359.
[7] Thomas Huper, Shigeru Endo, Nobuyuki Ishikawa, Koichi Osawa, ISIJ Interna-
tional 39 (3) (1999) 288294.
[8] A. Bag, K.K. Ray, E.S. Dwarakadasa, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A:
Physical Metallurgy and Materials Science 30 (5) (1999) 11931202.
[9] Concetta Capotorto, Primp Gondi, Roberto Montanari, Zeitschrift fuer Metal-
lkunde 79 (4) (1988) 220225.
[10] J.Y. Koo, G. Thomas, Scripta Metallurgica 13 (12) (1979) 11411145.
[11] Murat Yazizi, Ali Durmus, Ali Bayram, Material Pruefung/Material Testing 45
(5) (2003) 2142219.
[12] Qu Jinbo, Dabboussi Wael, Hassani Farid, Nemes James, Yue Steve, ISIJ Interna-
tional 45 (11) (2005) 17411746.
[13] A. Belyakov, Y. Kimura, K. Tsuzaki, Acta Materialia 54 (2006) 25212532.
[14] Y.J. Chao, J.D. Ward Jr., R.G. Sands, Materials and Design 28 (2007) 551557.
[15] Z. Sterjovski, D.P. Dunne, D.G. Carr, S. Ambrose, ISIJ International 44 (6) (2004)
11141120.
[16] W. Guo, H. Dong, M. Lu, X. Zhao, International Journal of Pressure Vessels and
Piping 79 (2002) 403412.
[17] Mauricio Carvalho Silva, Eduardo Hippert Jr., Claudio Ruggieri, Proceedings of
PVP2005 2005 ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Division Conference, Denver,
CO, USA, July 1721, 2005, pp. 16.
[18] Kim Wallin, International Journal of Pressure Vessels and Piping 78 (2001)
463470.
[19] Xiong qingren, Feng Yaorong, Huo Chunyong, Li Weiwei, Materials for Mechan-
ical Engineering 29 (12) (2005) 2125.
[20] W. Guo, H. Dong, Z. Yang, M. Lu, X. Zhao, J. Luo, Acta Metallurgica Sinica 37 (4)
(2001) 386390.
[21] A. Ray, S.K. Paul, S. Jha, Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance 4 (6)
(1995) 679688.
[22] J. Chiang, Jiang C, SAE Paper 2004-01-0165.
[23] M. Marya, X.Q. Gayden, Welding Journal 84 (12) (2005), 197-s-2004-s.
[24] Murali D. Tumuluru, Welding Journal 85 (8) (2006) 3137.
[25] A.J. Duncan, K. Miller, Y.J. Chao, ASME PVP-Vol. 413, Understanding and Predict-
ing Material Degradation, In: R. Mohan (Ed.), ASME Pressure Vessel and Piping
Conference, July 2000, pp. 143150.
[26] Joseph R. Davis, Robert Stedfeld, Steven R. Lampman, Metal Handbook, 1, ASM
International, 1990.
[27] Hou Zengshou, Practical Trinary Alloy Phase Diagram (1983) 05.
[28] Jing Cainian, Wang Zuocheng, Materials Review 18 (11) (2004) 3639.