Defining the Post-Machined Sub-surface in Austenitic Stainless Steels

Abstract

Austenitic stainless steels grades, with differences in chemistry, stacking fault energy, and thermal conductivity, were subjected to vertical milling. Anodic potentiodynamic polarization was able to differentiate (with machining speed/strain rate) between different post-machined sub-surfaces in SS 316L and Alloy A (a Cu containing austenitic stainless steel: Sanicroe 28™), but not in SS 304L. However, such differences (in the post-machined sub-surfaces) were revealed in surface roughness, sub-surface residual stresses and misorientations, and in the relative presence of sub-surface Cr₂O₃ films. It was shown, quantitatively, that higher machining speed reduced surface roughness and also reduced the effective depths of the affected sub-surface layers. A qualitative explanation on the sub-surface microstructural developments was provided based on the temperature-dependent thermal conductivity values. The results herein represent a mechanistic understanding to rationalize the corrosion performance of widely adopted engineering alloys.

Appendix

Strain (ε) and strain rate (έ) calculated as per (Eqs. [A.1] and [A.2]), respectively.

$$ \varepsilon = \frac{{\cot \left( {\phi_{n} } \right) + \tan (\phi_{n} - \gamma_{n} )}}{{\cos \eta_{s} }} $$

(A.1)

$$ \varepsilon^{\prime} = \frac{{V_{s} }}{\Delta \gamma } $$

(A.2)

$$ \eta_{s} = \tan^{ - 1} \left( {\frac{{(\tan \omega \times \cos \left( {\phi_{n} - \gamma_{n} } \right)) + (\tan \eta_{s} \times \sin \phi_{n} )}}{{\cos \eta_{s} }}} \right) $$

(A.3)