See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/288250895

New Constitutive Model for Hot Working

Article in Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A December 2015

DOI: 10.1007/s11661-015-3280-y

CITATIONS READS

0 57

3 authors, including:

Fei Chen Zhenshan Cui

Shanghai Jiao Tong University Shanghai Jiao Tong University
43 PUBLICATIONS 359 CITATIONS 132 PUBLICATIONS 1,117 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Engineering and Physical Science Research Council of UK (EP/K029592/1 & EP/L02084X/1) View
project

All content following this page was uploaded by Fei Chen on 06 September 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

New Constitutive Model for Hot Working
FEI CHEN, GUOWEI FENG, and ZHENSHAN CUI

Based on plane regressions of a set of key points in the ow curves without using SellarsTegart
(ST) assumptions, a new approach to determine parameters in classical two-stage constitutive
equations in hot working was presented. All the parameters in constitutive equations can be
obtained at dierent temperatures and strain rates. The ow stress and recrystallized volume
fraction can be predicted when workpieces undergo dierent conditions during plastic
deformation. Experiment data of 12 pctCr was used to verify the model. The results show
that when using ST model, some bounces occurred near the critical points, while using the
proposed model, the results show better precision especially in determining the characteristic
points such as critical strain, peak strain, and steady stress.

DOI: 10.1007/s11661-015-3280-y
 The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society and ASM International 2015

I. INTRODUCTION to express the recrystallized volume fraction for dynamic

DURING the past several decades, numerous ow
stress models for steel have been proposed, which are
widely used in hot working not only to predict the hot
forming force but also to optimize the microstructure
and properties of the workpiece.[1,2] Kocks[3] showed
that the evolution of the dislocation density (q) with
strain (e) can be written as
dq p a piecewise function:
k1 q  k2 q
de
where k1 represents work hardening; and k2 represents
the recovery of dislocation. Let q = q0 when e = 0, and
according to some following researches,[46] by integrat-
ing Eq. [1], the following expression was obtained:
 
k1 k1 k2 e p k2 e 2
q  e 2 q0 e 2 : 2
k2 k2
When dq/de = 0, qs = (k1/k2)2 is obtained, where qs
is the saturation dislocation density, corresponding with
the saturation stress (rs) during work hardening (WH).
The ow stress is proportional to the square root of
dislocation density as given in
p all, it is desirable to establish the relationships between
r nlb q 3
where n is a constant, l is the shear modulus, and b is
magnitude of Burgers vector, respectively. Based on
Avrami equation,[7] some modications[2,810] were made
FEI CHEN, Research Fellow, is with the National Engineering
Research Center for Die and Mold CAD, Shanghai Jiao Tong
University, 1954 Huashan Road, Shanghai 200030, P.R. China, and
also with the Department of Mechanical, Materials and Manufacturing
Engineering, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2RD UK.
Contact e-mails: Fei.Chen@nottingham.ac.uk; feechn@gmail.com
GUOWEI FENG, Master, and ZHENSHAN CUI, Professor, are with
the National Engineering Research Center for Die and Mold CAD,
Shanghai Jiao Tong University. Contact e-mail: cuizs@sjtu.edu.cn
Manuscript submitted June 3, 2015.
Article published online December 17, 2015
recrystallization (DRX). A common expression is
   
e  ec n d
X 1  exp kd 4
ep
where ec is the critical strain for DRX, and ep is the
peak strain corresponding to peak stress (rp). kd and
nd are the parameters to be determined. Combining
Eqs. [2], [3], and [4], Laasraoui and Jonas[4] proposed
1
(  
rWH rs r0  rs  exp  k22  e e<ec
   nd 
r rWH  rs  rss  1  exp kd ep eec
e  ec
5
where rWH is the ow stress when only WH and dynamic
recovery (DRV) occur. Equation [5] shows the relation-
ship of ow stress (r) and strain (e) for a certain
temperature (T) and strain rates (_e), and it has been
widely used to express the constitutive relationship for
deformation under DRX.[1] As illustrated in Eq. [5], it
contains some characteristic points, including initial
stress (r0), critical strain (ec), peak strain (ep), saturation
stress (rs) and steady-state stress (rss).[6] Therefore, rst of
these characteristic points and the thermomechanical
parameters (temperature and strain rate). In the last two
decades, numerous models have been developed, and
modications or new formulations are currently being
proposed.[1122]
A nonexhaustive list of recent studies concerned
with this aspect includes the works of Garofalo,[11]
Sandstrom and Lagneborg,[12] Sellars and Tegart,[1315]
Mecking and Kocks,[16,17] Poliak and Jonas,[5] Barnett
et al.,[8] Roters et al.,[18] Poliak and Jonas,[19,20]
Roucoules et al.,[21] Gottstein et al.,[9] Svyetlichnyy,[22,23]
Najazadeh and Jonas,[24] Mirzadeh et al.,[25] Jonas
et al.,[6] Solhjoo,[26] Mirzadeh and Najazadeh,[27] Fan
et al.,[28] Mirzadeh et al.,[29, 30] Bambach,[1] Jonas
et al.[31] Among these models, ST model[1315] has been

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A VOLUME 47A, MARCH 20161229

used more extensively in industry. At the same time, it is
still widely used to predict metal formability and
microstructure evolution in hot-working processing even
today.[32,33] When ST model was adopted, an assumption
of hyperbolic sine function was usually used to describe the
relationship between ow stress (r ) and ZenerHollomon
parameter (Z),[34] which can be written as[1315,35]
 
Qact
Z e_ exp Asinhar n 6
R0 T
where A, a, and n are the parameters to be determined. R0,
T, and Qact are the gas constant (8.318 J mol1 K1), the
absolute temperature, and the activation energy for hot
deformation, respectively. According to the research of
Garofalo,[11] the assumption of hyperbolic sine function
has been used to characterize the relationship of minimum
creep rate and the applied stress, which satises conditions
for both low and high stresses in the experiments for
copper, aluminum, and an austenitic stainless steel.
Garofalos work was based on the edge dislocation climb
mechanism used by Weertman[36] in low stresses and jog
migration theory analyzed by Feltham and Meakin[37] in
high stresses, which oer physical basis for the utility of
hyperbolic sine function. As the mechanism of strain rate
in hot deformation is quite analogous to that of minimum
creep rate, based on torsion tests, Sellars and
Tegart[1315,35] applied this nonlinear function to hot
working. As McQueen et al.[38] reported, no matter in low
or high stress levels, the assumption of hyperbolic sine
function has been widely and successfully used for most
metal materials where either DRV is the only mechanism
or DRX takes place as well. However, as hyperbolic
function is strongly nonlinear and hard to solve, in order
to determine the involved parameters in the ST model, the
hyperbolic sine function has to be simplied to a power
function at low stress level and an exponential function at
high stress level, for it is easy to solve the equation by
linearization techniques. However, as the parameter a in
Eq. [6] can only be obtained in subsequent calculations, it
is hard to know whether the ar belongs to low or high
stress level. Details can be seen in Section IIA. To solve
this problem, Cingara and McQueen[39] developed a sound
method by selecting an estimated initial value of a from the
characterize the condition of recrystallization for metal
in hot working, it is essential to improve the accuracy of
calculation in characterizing these points.
In this paper, the deciency encountered in the
practical application of ST model was discussed. The
methods to extract key stress/strain points from
experimental data were introduced. Without using ST
assumptions, the relationship of stress with respect to
temperature and strain rate was modeled by tting
with multiple linear equations. Besides, quadric sur-
faces were used to predict exponential parameters in
constitutive equation. By comparison of the predic-
tions and experimental data, the newly developed
method shows better accuracy in predicting the posi-
tion of key points such as peak stress, peak strain, and
steady stress. In general, this exible technique pro-
vides a novel way to nd/determine the characteristic
points in the ow stress curves, and for further
constitutive modeling of the ow stress for steel under
hot working.
II. MODELING OF FLOW STRESS
A. Analysis of ST Model
The Taylor expansion of hyperbolic function in ST
model can be written as
ear  ear ar 3 ar 5
sinhar ar 
2 3! 5!
ar 2m1
: 7
2m 1!
In low stress levels or when ar <0:8,[38] the higher-order
terms can be neglected,sinhar  ar , and Eq. [6] is
replaced as
0
Z Asinhar n  Aar n 8
0 0 n0
where n n. Let A A  a , and a power function
can be drawn:
0

literature or from plots of log_e  logrp and log_e  rp for Z  A0 rn : 9

the whole stress range, and then adjusting a until a good t
is obtained in a plot of ln sinh arp  1/T. Besides, Rieiro In high stress level or when ar >1:2,[38]
et al.[40] linearized Eq. [1] by considering it as a plane, and lim ear ! 0 and sinhar  ear =2:Hence, Eq. [6]
varied a to nd the best correlation with the experimental ar !1

data for the regression planes. These methods provide can be simplied as
possibility to determine the dierent constants involved in A n00 ar
the ST model. However, as a is a small value and the Z Asinhar n  e 10
2n00
nonlinear method is sensitive to its variation, adjusting the 00
parameter a is largely based on experience. Therefore, in where n00 n. Let A00 A=2n and b n00  a, and
practical application, most researches have to simplify this Eq. [6] is replaced as an exponential function, which
problem and do not distinguish the variables in dierent can be written as
stress ranges, resulting in two imperfections. One imper-
Z  A00 expbr 11
fection is the poor accuracy in characterizing the key
points in ow stress, such as the peak stress and the
relevant strain. The other one results from the bounces on It is worth noting that although n0 in Eq. [8] and n00 in
the transit point between low and high stress levels. Since Eq. [10] are both equal to n in the formula, they are not
the key points in ow stress are also the basis to numerically equivalent exactly, for n0 is obtained by

1230VOLUME 47A, MARCH 2016 METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

regressing the experimental data in low stress level by
simplied approximate equation, Eq. [8], and n00 in
Eq. [10] is obtained in high stress level. Data in dierent
stress ranges may bring in discrepancies. Therefore,
when using the ST model, the researchers are still
puzzled by the following problems[38,4144]:
1. It is hard to define low or high stress level until a is
determined. Although the hyperbolic sine function
has been simplified to two equations in different
stress levels, most researches apply all the stress
values to determine the involved parameters, with-
out distinguishing the low or high stresses because a
can only be obtained in subsequent works. For most
steels, r varies from dozens to hundreds mega
pascal, and the factor a is often between 0.01 and
0.025,[38,41,42,47] so the values of ar range from 0.1
to 5.0. Neither Eq. [9] nor Eq. [11] can be reason-
ably used in such a wide range. Besides that, it is
hard to deal with the range from 0.8 to 1.2, which
belongs to neither low nor high stress level, but
takes up an extensive part in the whole stress range.
2. Parameters need to be distinguished, but they are
difficult to be separated in fact. In most works, n0 in
Eq. [9] is the slope of regression lines in ln r  ln e_
plot, while b in Eq. [11] is obtained by the gradient of
regression lines in r -ln e_ plot. In the practical use of
ST model,[38,41,44,45]a b=n0 . However, n0 is calcu-
lated in low stress level, and b is obtained in high stress
level. As the slopes of regression lines for different
ranges of stresses are not guaranteed to be the same, a
can only be obtained as an approximate value.
3. Temperature and strain rate cannot be applied to
determine the parameters simultaneously. In most
researches,[24,38,41,42,44,48] stress exponent n in
Eq. [11] is obtained in ln e_  ln sinhar plot when
temperature (T) is a constant. Qact is obtained by
ln sinhar  1=T plot when strain rate (_e) is a
constant. Therefore, as only a portion of the
experimental data can be used in one regression, it
is unstable if one of the experiments is conducted
imprecisely.
B. New Modeling Method
Some key stresses, such as r0, rp, rc, rs, and rss, and
their corresponding strains, are the results of WH and
dynamic softening (DRV and DRX) interacting with
each other. As the ability of atom diusion and the
propulsion of dislocation motion depend on tempera-
ture, while the accumulation of dislocation density and
grain bound energy relies on strain rate, the key stresses/
strains must have some relationship with temperature
and strain rates. It has been demonstrated in previous
work[36,49] that creep mechanism is based on a climb-
plus-glide sequence at high temperature. According to
this theory, the steady-state stress shows a power
relationship with strain rate, which is called power-law,
creep law, or Bailey-Norton law. This is given by
e_ / rns 12
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
The BaileyNorton law is still widely used to repre-
sent the primary and secondary stages of creep because
most designers for structural integrity are more inter-
ested in these two creep stages. The simple power-law
breaks down at high stresses at high temperatures,
where tertiary creep easily occurs, and exponential
function is more suitable to describe the relationship
of stress and strain rate. However, for hot working,
especially heavy forging, hydraulic presses are usually
used, and forgings can be easily kept warm under most
circumstances. The forgings usually do not undergo
such high strain rates and stresses. As SherbyDorn
proposed, the relationship between strain rate and
temperature can be expressed as
 
Qact
e_ / exp  13
R0 T
where Qact is usually obtained by regression process in
ln(sinhar)  1/T plot where strain rate is a constant,
and in ln e_  ln(sinhar) plot for isothermal experimental
data, as not all experimental data can be used in one
regression process, which may lead to errors. Therefore,
it is more convenient to calculate the data in one
regression process.
Based on Eqs. [12] and [13], a combined equation is
shown as
a 
3
rx expa1  e_ a2  exp 14
T
There are two main methods for identication of
model parameters in Eq. [14]: logarithmical lineariza-
tion and nonlinear minimization methods. In this study,
Eq. [14] was linearized by taking natural logarithms of
both sides:
1
ln rx a1 a2 ln e_ a3 15
T
where rx stands for r0, rc, rp, rs, and rss; a1, a2, and a3
are the coecients to be determined; ec and ep corre-
spond to rc and rp in r-e plot, respectively. In the actual
operation, if the natural logarithm of stress (ln r ),
strain rate (ln e_ ), and the reciprocal of temperature (1/T)
are plotted in a three-dimensional (3D) space coordi-
nate, it is found that the corresponding points lie on a
plane approximately.
An additional discovery is that the form of Eq. [14] is
quite similar to ZenerHollomon parameter (Z) in
Eq. [6]. Qact can be used in some other simulating
calculations such as multiscale modeling[50] and nite
element analysis for grain evolution.[51] The transfor-
mation of Eq. [14] is
  a2
a3
rx expa1  e_  exp 16
a2 T
Compared with Z in Eq. [6], Qact can be obtained by
the function:
a3
Qact  R0 17
a2
VOLUME 47A, MARCH 20161231
 whereas parameters such as k2, kd, and nd in Eq. [5] and the saturation stress corresponds to the solution
can be obtained by tting. Actually, it is hard to nd of Eq. [23] when h 0, and
their linear relationships with respect to temperatures
and strain rates. Quadric surface tting can be utilized 9A1 A2 A3  2A32  27A21 A4 A2
rs  25
to describe a phenomenological relationship: 27A21 A3  9A1 A22 3A1
 2
1 2 1 1
ln x c1 c2 ln e_ c3 c4 ln e_ c5 c6 ln e_
T T T
18
III. EXPERIMENTAL MATERIAL AND
where x stands for k2, kd, and nd. c1, ...., c6 are theun- PROCEDURES
determined coecients. Equation [18] can be also writ-
The present investigation has been carried out employ-
ten as
ing dierent eective strainstress curves obtained from
 c3 c5 
c6
samples of commercial turbine rotor steel, namely,
x e_ c2 c4 ln e_ T  exp c1 2 19
T T 12 pctCr, nominal compositions of which are listed in
Table I. 12 pct refers to the weight percentage of Cr.
First, all the cylindrical specimens of the test steels were
machined to the dimension of 10 mm 9 15 mm. In
C. Determination of Characteristic Points from order to minimize the occurrence of inhomogeneous
Experimental Data compression due to the existence of friction between the
Critical stress, which has been referred in many anvils and the specimen surface, the entire end face of the
previous works,[1,5,19,20,24,52,53] corresponds to the onset specimen was machined away except for a small rim to
of DRX. An easy way to identify the critical stress is to form a reservoir.[25,30] Subsequently, the reservoirs were
t the h  r curve by a cubic polynomial function, lled with glass powder as a lubricant material. Then, the
proposed by Najazadeh et al.[24] The method is also uniaxial hot compression tests were carried out on a
used in the following researches,[41,53] and the tting Gleeble-3500 thermomechanical simulator. The speci-
equation in h  r plot is assumed as mens were heated to 1523 K (1250 C) at a heating rate
of 10 Ks1 (10 Cs1) and held for 3 minutes. Then, the
h A1 r3 A2 r2 A3 r A4 20 specimens were cooled to deformation temperature at the
cooling rate of 10 Ks1 (10 Cs1) and held for 30 sec-
where A1, A2, A3, and A4 are the undetermined coe- onds to obtain a uniform temperature distribution. The
cients. The critical stress corresponds to the zero of its tests were conducted at nominal deformation tempera-
second-order equation: tures of 1223 K, 1323 K, 1373 K, 1423 K, 1473 K, and
1523 K (950 C, 1050 C, 1100 C, 1150 C, 1200 C,
d2 h A2
h00 2
6A1 r 2A2 0 ) rc  21 and 1250 C) and strain rates of 0.1, 0.01, 0.001, and
dr 3A1 0.0005 s1. The re curves were obtained, as shown in
Figure 1. According to Figure 1, the characteristics of
When rc is determinate, ec can be easily obtained as it stressstrain curves for 12 pctCr are quite typical, which
is the strain corresponding to rc in ow curve. are represented as follows:
Saturation stress is a hypothetical value that is  It can be seen that the effects of the temperature and
extrapolated by work-hardening rate (h), and it attri- strain rate on the flow stress are significant. Relative
butes to the dynamic recovery (DRV) alone. The high temperature and low strain rate results in lower
saturation stress is obtained when work-hardening rate
drops to zero. Therefore, the tangent line on critical
point can be used to obtain the saturation stress. The
work-hardening rate on critical point is Table I. The Main Chemical Compositions of 12 pctCr Steel
(Mass Fraction, Percentage)
2A32 A2 A3
hc  A4 ; 22
27A21 3A1 Element Weight Percentage

and the derivative of work-hardening rate is C 0.11 to 0.13

Mn 0.40 to 0.50
dh A2 Cr 10.20 to 10.80
h0c A3  2 23 Mo 1.00 to 1.10
dr rrc 3A1 V 0.15 to 0.25
Nb 0.04 to 0.06
Hence, the tangent line can be written as N 0.045 to 0.06
Ni 0.70 to 0.80
 3     W 0.95 to 1.05
2A2 A2 A3 A22 A2
h  A4 A3  r ; Si 0.12
27A21 3A1 3A1 3A1 S 0.005
24 P 0.01

1232VOLUME 47A, MARCH 2016 METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

Fig. 1True stressstrain curves for 12 pctCr under strain rates of: (a) 0.1 s1; (b) 0.01 s1; (c) 0.001 s1, and (d) 0.0005 s1 and at dierent
temperatures: 1-1223 K (950 C), 2-1323 K (1050 C), 3-1373 K (1100 C), 4-1423 K (1150 C), 5-1473 K (1200 C), and 6-1523 K (1250 C).
stress. For example, the stress decreases from 150 to
15 MPa when the temperature increases from
1223 K to 1523 K (950 C to 1250 C) and the
strain rate decreases from 0.1 to 0.0005 s1.
 For a single curve, due to the dominance of work
hardening (WH), the stress sharply increases in the
initial stage. As strain increases, DRV becomes more
obvious, and the rate of rise is getting weaker. After
deformation reaches a peak strain, the stress
decreases for sake of DRX which plays a more
significant role in softening mechanism. At last, the
flow stress comes into a steady-state region due to the
interaction of work hardening and dynamic softening.
 At a given strain rate, the higher the deformation
temperature, the greater the dynamic softening extent
and rate, and the lower the peak stress. At a certain
temperature, the higher the strain rate, the higher the
rate of working hardening, and the higher the peak
stress. It is also found that the value of strain
corresponding to the peak stress moves toward a
higher strain-level with decreases the deformation
temperature. This is because lower strain rates provide
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
longer time for energy accumulation, and higher
temperatures result in higher mobility at the bound-
aries for the nucleation and growth of dynamic
recrystallized grains and dislocation annihilation,
and thus reduce the peak stress level. Therefore,
materials with a high deformation temperature are
more prone to DRX.
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A. Determination of Characteristic Points
Approximation functions were used to formulize the
experimental ow curves. The dierential equations of
the approximation functions are he curves. The hr
plots, which are shown in Figure 2, can be constructed
by nding the corresponding r with e. rc corresponds to
the inection points on hr curves. Cubic polynomial
curve can t the hr plot well and make it easy to
calculate the inection point. It can be seen that at the
initial stage of DRX, the work-hardening rate, h,
VOLUME 47A, MARCH 20161233
exhibits an abrupt descent, which is attributed to the
sharp increase of dislocation density. Subsequently, it
gradually decreases with the increasing stress under the
interaction of DRV and DRX. Meanwhile, several
turning points on the work-hardening rate curves can be
seen clearly. When the work-hardening rate approxi-
mately drops to zero, the slope of the work-hardening
rate curve changes from negative to positive, which
indicates that the ow stress of hot compression reaches
its peak value. Furthermore, as shown in Figure 2,
saturated stress, rs, is obtained by extrapolating the
strain-hardening rate at critical point. The results show
that rs  1.1rp and rc  0.9rp, which are quite similar
to the experiential relationships.[24,27,41,46]
B. Predicting Characteristic Points at Different
Temperatures and Strain Rates
Using Eq. [16], planes can be tted to predict the
characteristic points, such as r0, rc, rp, rs, rss, ec, and ep,
with respect to the reciprocal of temperature and the
natural logarithm of strain rate. The predictions of rp
and rc are shown in Figure 3. The correlation coecient
(R) was employed to provide information on the
Fig. 2Determination of critical stress and saturation stress of ow curves at dierent deformation conditions from the tted curves of Fig. 1.
rc is the value at the point of inection. rp and rs are dened by the intercepts with the horizontal axis.
1234VOLUME 47A, MARCH 2016
strength of liner relationship between the experimental
and the predicted values. It is clear that the R value is
higher than 0.9, which means to prove the excellent
capability of the developed model to predict the
characteristic points of the studied 12 pctCr. Expres-
sions of characteristic points can be listed in Table II.
In the application of the ST model, temperature or
strain rate is constant, and only a part of the experi-
mental data can be used,[24,2741] while in the presented
model, all the experimental data were used in the
regression plane, which make the model more
stable and robust. As the coecients a1, a2, and a3 in
Eq. [16] are obtained by linear tting, active energy
predicted by Eq. [17] is 432,154 J/mol for 12 pctCr,
which is quite similar to 452,090 J/mol calculated using
the ST model. With the predicted characteristic points
by regression planes and piecewise function in Eq. [5],
the ow curves can be tted one by one to obtain
parameters such as k2, kd, and nd in Eq. [5]. Parameters
such as k2, kd, and nd in Eq. [5] are determined by
nonlinear tting. Although the coecients of associa-
tion are not so ideal, the trends can be roughly
described, which are shown in Figure 4. The expressions
of parameters are listed in Table III.
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
Fig. 3Regression planes to predict the characteristic points: (a) yield stress, r0 was dened using a total strain oset of 0.02; (b) saturated
stress rs; (c) steady-state stress rss; (d) critical strain ec; (e) peak strain ep. The values of x-aix and y-aix are the reciprocal of the temperature and
the natural logarithm of strain rate, respectively.

C. Application of the Model to Experimental Data
In this study, the ST model was also established as
shown in Table IV. To validate the correctness of the
model, comparisons are made, as shown in Figure 5. It
can be easily found that the case of strain rate of
0.01 s1 is the most ideal one, i.e., the experimental and
predicted results are in good agreement no matter
whether determined by ST model or by the developed
model in this work. However, for the case of strain rates
of 0.1, 0.001, and 0.0005 s1 and temperature of 1223 K
(950 C), there are obvious errors between the experi-
mental and predicted results of the ST model. Mean-
while, there are some bounces that occurred near the
critical points in the results of ST model.
Comparisons for predicted characteristic points
are shown in Figure 6. The calculated correlation

METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A VOLUME 47A, MARCH 20161235

coecients (R) are 0.93, 0.98, and 0.99 for ep, rp and rss, paper is quite similar to the simplied ST model in low
both of which are higher than the values predicted by ST stress level. The advantage of this model is avoiding the
model. The comparison results indicate that there is a use of Qact, and all the parameters can be obtained by
good correlation between the predicted and measured
data obtained by means of the proposed model. In other Table III. Expressions of Exponential Parameters
 
k2 e_ 1:5120:02636 ln e_  T  exp 20:22 69293
1659
words, the model proposed in this paper has greater T 
49990000
T2
precision and has some advantages in predicting the  
kd e_ 0:38320:08693 ln e_ T  exp 15:02 24059
1854
3276000
positions of peak strain and critical strain, which play T  T2
 
nd e_ 1:0860:02504 ln e_  T  exp 9:309 35307
1801
30020000
important roles in engineering application. Further, it is T  T2
also worth noting that in lower stress levels, such as T (K); e_ (s1).
rp 100 MPa, both the ST model and the model
presented have sound predictive abilities. However, in
higher stress levels such as rp 100 MPa, the predicted Table IV. ST Model
values and experimental data have larger discrepancies, (  
rWH rs r0  rs  exp  k22  e e<ec
at least in this research. By nature, the model in this    nd 
r rWH  rs  rss  1  exp kd ee ep
c
e  ec
452090
Table II. Expressions of Characteristic Points Z e_ exp RT
 
r0 0:4823_e0:1285  exp 6883
T ep 0:0009Z0:14
0:1619
8331 ec 0:83ep
rs 0:2794_e  exp T
  r0 0:51Z0:12  
rss 0:0931_e0:1671  exp 9505
T
rs 43:77 sinh1 2:49 104 Z0:25
   
ec 0:0022_e0:1604  exp 6632 rss 43:77 sinh1 2:90 104 Z0:24
T 0:074
  X 155:11Z
ep 0:0026_e0:1603  exp 6633
T kd 1:05; nd 1:24
Stress (MPa); T (K); e_ (s1). Stress (MPa); T (K); e_ (s1).

Fig. 4Quadric surface tting to predict the (a) k2, (b) kd, and (c) nd. The values of x-aix and y-aix are the reciprocal of temperature and the
natural logarithm of strain rate, respectively.

1236VOLUME 47A, MARCH 2016 METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A

Fig. 5Comparisons between the predicted and the measured ow stress curves of the studied 12 pctCr under the strain rates of (a) 0.1 s1; (b)
0.01 s1; (c) 0.001 s1, and (d) 0.0005 s1 and at dierent temperatures: 1-1223 K (950 C), 2-1323 K (1050 C), 3-1373 K (1100 C), 4-1423 K
(1150 C), 5-1473 K (1200 C), and 6-1523 K (1250 C).
the least-squared method, so the results show better
precision. Therefore, the model in this paper is more
suitable for soft materials, high temperature, or low
strain rate process in industry. In high stress levels, both
models can hardly predict the peak stress precisely, but
it might be better to use the mean values.
In general, as seen from Figures 5 and 6, predicted
curves of proposed model are somewhat better than
those of the ST model, but not excellent. The
errors mainly come from the following three compo-
nents. The rst one is due to the predictve ability of the
classical phenomenological model itself, Eq. [5]. The
typical characteristic of Eq. [5] includes piecewise addi-
tive function and main parameters, such as rs, rss, and
ep. Therefore, accurate equations for description of these
parameters play a key role in the Eq. [5]. The second
component is associated with approximation equation
for model parameters, Eqs. [14] and [19]. By introducing
the quadric function, Eq. [19] into Eq. [5], the additional
degree of freedom leads to better results, because it
reduced the approximation error. The third component
is an error of the method of identication of the model
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
parameters. Linearization introduces additional discrep-
ancy. Besides, measurement error of experimental study
should be taken into account.
V. CONCLUSIONS
A novel way to model the ow stress in hot working
has been presented. The new model is not developed by
using the ST assumption, which employs a hyperbolic
function to describe relationship among ow stress,
strain rate, and temperature. The hyperbolic is nonlinear
and hard to solve, leaving some problems still remaining
to faced by the industrial application of ST model.
Methods to determine characteristic stresses/strains
from experimental strainstress curves are formulated,
and by regressing them with the new model, other key
stresses/strains at dierent temperature and strain rate
can be predicted. Exponents such as k2, kd, and nd in
Eq. [5] can be calculated by quadric function of two
variables. As all the parameters in constitutive equations
can be obtained at dierent temperatures and strain
VOLUME 47A, MARCH 20161237
Fig. 6Comparisons of the predicted (a) peak strain ep, (b) peak stress rp, and (c) steady stress rss curves obtained by the developed model and
ST model.
rates, the ow stress, and percentage of DRX can be
predicted when workpieces undergo dierent conditions
for plastic deformation.
The new model can successfully predict the key stress/
strain with respect to strain rate and temperature with
the following advantages:
1. Easier to solve the function. The new model was
developed based on the BaileyNorton creep law
and SherbyDorn relation, which only contain
power function and exponential relationship, respec-
tively, and can be linearized to a plane equation. All
the parameters contained in the new model can be
obtained by simple least squared method.
2. More robust to calculate the parameters. The
multiple linear regressions for a plane in 3D space
take temperature and strain rate into account
simultaneously. All the experimental data can be
used in one computation, and an individual bad
experimental result has insignificant effluence on
the result, while some parameters involved in the ST
1238VOLUME 47A, MARCH 2016
model can only be obtained when temperature or
strain rate is a constant.
3. More accurate to predict the flow stress. Compar-
isons between experimental data and predicted val-
ues for some key stress/strain are made. The results
show that the new developed model in this work has
better precision in predicting the flow stress, espe-
cially when the stress is not higher than 100 MPa.
As the model is based on the BaileyNorton law,
which is usually used to describe the primary and
secondary stages of creep, it is more suitable to predict
the forming force and microstructure in heavy forging
where temperature is high and strain rate is low.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the funding
support from the National Basic Research Program of
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
 China (Grant No. 2011CB012903), the National Sci-
ence and Technology Major Project (Grant No.
2012ZX04012011), and China Postdoctoral Science
Foundation (Grant No. 2013M531171).
REFERENCES
1. F. Roters, P. Eisenlohr, L. Hantcherli, D.D. Tjahjanto, T.R.
Bieler, and D. Raabe: Acta Mater., 2010, vol. 58, pp. 1152211.
2. M. Bambach: Acta Mater., 2013, vol. 61, pp. 622233.
3. U.F. Kocks: J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 1976, vol. 98, pp. 7685.
4. A. Laasraoui and J.J. Jonas: Metall. Trans. A, 1991, vol. 22A,
pp. 154558.
5. E.I. Poliak and J.J. Jonas: Acta Mater., 1996, vol. 44, pp. 12736.
6. J.J. Jonas, X. Quelennec, L. Jiang, and Etienne. Martin: Acta
Mater., 2009, vol. 57, pp. 274856.
7. M. Avrami: J. Chem. Phys., 1939, vol. 7, pp. 110312.
8. M.R. Barnett, G.L. Kelly, and P.D. Hodgson: Scripta Mater.,
2000, vol. 43, pp. 36569.
9. G. Gottstein, M. Frommert, M. Goerdeler, and N. Schafer: Ma-
ter. Sci. Eng. A, 2004, vols. 387389, pp. 60408.
10. J.H. Beynon and C.M. Sellars: ISIJ Int., 1992, vol. 32, pp. 35967.
11. F. Garofalo and H.A. Wriedt: Acta Metall., 1962, vol. 10,
pp. 100712.
12. R. Sandstrom and R. Lagneborg: Acta Metall., 1975, vol. 23,
pp. 38798.
13. C.M. Sellars and W.J.Mc.G. Tegart: Mem. Sci. Rev. Metal., 1966,
vol. 63, pp. 731746 (in French).
14. C.M. Sellars and W.J.McG Tegart: Int. Metall. Rev., 1972, vol. 17,
pp. 124.
15. C.M. Sellars and W.J.McG Tegart: Acta Metall., 1996, vol. 14,
pp. 113638.
16. H. Mecking and U.F. Kocks: Acta Metall., 1981, vol. 29,
pp. 186575.
17. H. Mecking and U.F. Kocks: Prog. Mater Sci., 2003, vol. 48,
pp. 171273.
18. F. Roters, D. Raabe, and G. Gottstein: Acta Mater., 2000, vol. 48,
pp. 418189.
19. E.I. Poliak and J.J. Jonas: ISIJ Int., 2003, vol. 43, pp. 68491.
20. E.I. Poliak and J.J. Jonas: ISIJ Int., 2003, vol. 43, pp. 692700.
21. C. Roucoules, M. Pietrzyk, and P.D. Hodgson: Mater. Sci. Eng.
A, 2003, vol. 339, pp. 19.
22. D.S. Svyetlichnyy: ISIJ Int., 2005, vol. 45, pp. 118793.
23. D.S. Svyetlichnyy: Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 2013, vol. 576, pp. 14048.
24. A. Najazadeh and J.J. Jonas: ISIJ Int., 2006, vol. 46,
pp. 167984.
25. H. Mirzadeh, A. Najazadeh, and M. Moazeny: Metall. Mater.
Trans. A, 2009, vol. 40A, pp. 295058.
METALLURGICAL AND MATERIALS TRANSACTIONS A
View publication stats
26. S. Solhjoo: Mater. Des., 2010, vol. 31, pp. 136064.
27. H. Mirzadeh and A. Najazadeh: Mater. Des., 2010, vol. 31,
pp. 117479.
28. X.G. Fan and H. Yang: Int. J. Plas., 2011, vol. 27, pp. 183352.
29. H. Mirzadeh, J.M. Cabrera, and A. Najazadeh: Acta Mater.,
2011, vol. 59, pp. 644148.
30. H. Mirzadeh, J.M. Cabrera, and A. Najazadeh: Metall. Mater.
Trans. A, 2012, vol. 43, pp. 10823.
31. J.J. Jonas, C. Ghosh, X. Quelennec, and V.V. Basabe: ISIJ Int.,
2013, vol. 53, pp. 14551.
32. E.S. Puchi-Cabrera, M.H. Staia, J.D. Guerin, J. Lesage, M.
Dubar, and D. Chicot: Int. J. Plas., 2013, vol. 51, pp. 14560.
33. E.S. Puchi-Cabrera, M.H. Staia, J.D. Guerin, J. Lesage, M.
Dubar, and D. Chicot: Int. J. Plas., 2014, vol. 54, pp. 11331.
34. C. Zener and J. Hollomon: J. Appl. Phy., 1944, vol. 15, pp. 2232.
35. C.M. Sellars and J.A. Whiteman: Metal Sci., 1979, vol. 13,
pp. 18794.
36. J. Weertman: J. Appl. Phy., 1955, vol. 26, pp. 121317.
37. P. Feltham and J.D. Meakin: Acta Metall., 1959, vol. 7,
pp. 61427.
38. H.J. McQueen, S. Yue, N.D. Ryan, and E. Fry: J. Mater. Process.
Technol., 1995, vol. 53, pp. 293310.
39. A. Cingara and H.J. McQueen: J. Mater. Process. Technol., 1992,
vol. 36, pp. 1730.
40. I. Rieiro, O.A. Ruano, M. Eddahbi, and M. Carsi: J. Mater.
Process. Technol., 1998, vol. 78, pp. 17783.
41. F. Chen, Z. Cui, and S. Chen: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2011, vol. 528,
pp. 507380.
42. C. Huang, E.B. Hawbolt, X. Chen, T.R. Meadowcroft, and D.K.
Matlock: Acta Mater., 2001, vol. 49, pp. 144552.
43. J. Liu, Z. Cui, and L. Ruan: Mater. Sci. Eng., A, 2011, vol. 529,
pp. 30010.
44. H.J. McQueen and N.D. Ryan: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2002, vol. 322,
pp. 4363.
45. H. Mirzadeh, J.M. Cabrera, J.M. Prado, and A. Najazadeh:
Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2011, vol. 528, pp. 387682.
46. S. Naghdy and A. Akbarzadeh: Mater. Des., 2014, vol. 53,
pp. 91014.
47. C.A.C. Imbert and H.J. McQueen: Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2001,
vol. 313, pp. 88103.
48. G.R. Stewart, A.M. Elwazri, S. Yue, and J.J. Jonas: Mater. Sci.
Technol., 2006, vol. 22, pp. 51924.
49. J. Weertman: J. Mech. Phy. Solids, 1956, vol. 4, pp. 23034.
50. T. Takaki, C. Yoshimoto, A. Yamanaka, and Y. Tomita: Int. J.
Plas., 2014, vol. 52, pp. 10516.
51. L. Donati, A. Segatori, M. El Mehtedi, and L. Tomesani: Int. J.
Plas., 2013, vol. 46, pp. 7081.
52. Y. Estrin, L.S. Toth, A. Molinari, and Y. Brechet: Acta Mater.,
1998, vol. 46, pp. 550922.
53. S. Solhjoo: Mate. Des., 2014, vol. 54, pp. 39093.
VOLUME 47A, MARCH 20161239