Modelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS You may also like

- Numerical investigation and experimental
Damage in dual phase steel DP1000 investigated validation of a plasticity model for sheet
steel forming
using digital image correlation and microstructure Tales Carvalho-Resende, Tudor Balan,
Salima Bouvier et al.

simulation - Strain hardening and micro-deformation

behavior in advanced DP and TRIP steels:
EBSD examinations and crystal plasticity
To cite this article: Khaled Alharbi et al 2015 Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 085005 simulations
N Saeidi, M Jafari, F Ashrafizadeh et al.

- Effect of material inhomogeneity on the

cyclic plastic deformation behavior at the
microstructural level: micromechanics-
View the article online for updates and enhancements. based modeling of dual-phase steel
Surajit Kumar Paul

This content was downloaded from IP address [Link] on 28/01/2023 at 09:39

 Modelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering

Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 (17pp) doi:10.1088/0965-0393/23/8/085005

Damage in dual phase steel DP1000

investigated using digital image correlation
and microstructure simulation
Khaled Alharbi1, Hassan Ghadbeigi1, Panos Efthymiadis2,
Mohammad Zanganeh1, Steven Celotto3,
Richard Dashwood2 and Christophe Pinna1
1
The University of Sheffield, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Mappin street,
Sheffield S1 3JD, UK
2
WMG, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
3
Tata Steel R&D, IJmuiden, The Netherlands

E-mail: kfmalharbi1@[Link]

Received 17 November 2014, revised 30 June 2015

Accepted for publication 14 August 2015
Published 9 October 2015

Abstract
Microstructure failure mechanisms and void nucleation in dual-phase (DP)
steels during deformation have been studied using a combination of in situ
tensile testing in a scanning electron microscope (SEM), digital image
correlation (DIC) and finite element (FE) modelling. SEM images acquired
during in situ tests were used to follow the evolution of damage within the
microstructure of a DP1000 steel. From these images, strain maps were
generated using DIC and used as boundary conditions for a FE model to
investigate the stress state of martensite and ferrite before the onset of the
martensite phase cracking. Based on the simulation results, a maximum
principal stress of about 1700 MPa has been estimated for crack initiation in
the martensite of the investigated DP1000 steel. The SEM image observations
in combination with the FE analyses provide new insights for the development
of physically-based damage models for DP-steels.

Keywords: dual-phase steels, digital image correlation, microstructure

simulation, martensite fracturing

(Some figures may appear in colour only in the online journal)

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence.
Any further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work,
journal citation and DOI.
0965-0393/15/085005+17$33.00 © 2015 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK 1
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

1. Introduction

Advanced high strength steels (AHSS) have the advantage of combined high strength and high
ductility. This combination of mechanical properties makes them useful in automotive applica-
tions where high strength is desirable for weight reduction through down-gauging and for crash
resistance, while the large fracture strain is important for good formability. Dual-phase (DP) steels
are the most common type of AHSS and have relatively large uniform elongation that makes them
most suitable for deep drawing and other stretch-forming based manufacturing processes.
The microstructure of DP-steels consists of hard martensite islands in a soft ferrite matrix.
This combination of hard and soft microstructure constituents leads to strain partitioning at
the microscopic level, which produces the useful mechanical properties mentioned earlier.
The strength and ductility of DP-steels not only depend on the volume fraction of the mar-
tensite, but also on the morphology and intrinsic mechanical properties of this secondary
microstructure constituent [1–3]. The enhancement of DP-steels’ properties for current and
future applications requires a critical investigation of the deformation and damage mecha-
nisms operating at the micro-scale in order to understand and predict their behaviour.
In order to understand the damage evolution in DP-steels, local strain distribution within the
microstructure has been studied by several researchers using digital image correlation (DIC).
Kang et al [4] studied damage initiation using DIC in DP600 with varying microstructures. A
comparison was made between inter-critically annealed (i.e. in the temperature regime where
both ferrite and austenite are stable) and quenched (to transform the austenite into martensite)
sheets to material that was subsequently tempered at 450 °C for 1 h and then slow cooled.
Tempering reduced the hardness differential by softening the martensite and hardening the fer-
rite. The tempered material deformed more before damage was observed compared to the as-
quenched only samples. The local strain for the initiation of damage (i.e. voids between two
martensite islands) increased from 40% in the annealed-quenched sample to 60% in the tempered
sample. The damage then progressed by either fracturing through the ferrite grains or along the
interface between ferrite and martensite. Ososkov et al [5] also used DIC to examine the strain
partitioning in DP600 steels and they reported local strain values within martensite-rich areas
with a maximum value of 30% and a maximum strain of 70% in the ferrite. Ghadbeigi et al [6]
utilised in situ tensile tests inside a SEM and used DIC to measure the strain fields in DP1000
during the deformation. The tests were interrupted at regular intervals in order to capture SEM
images of the deformed microstructure. These images were analysed using DIC to measure the
local plastic strain evolution in martensite and ferrite. Two damage mechanisms were observed,
the most common being the de-cohesion of the interface between martensite and ferrite followed
by martensite fracture. Voids in the ferrite phase nucleated in regions with a local strain of 120%.
So far, damage has been characterised in relation to strain distributions because DIC can
only measure displacements and, by differentiation, strain values. Stress distributions can be
obtained with the aid of finite element (FE) modelling and such microstructure-based simula-
tion has been a topic of active research over the past decade. Some investigators use micro-
structure modelling based on the realistic representations of the constituent morphology and
distributions to study the deformation and damage mechanisms of DP-steels. Kadkhodapour
et al [7] proposed two void initiation models based upon experimental observations and simula-
tion results of commercial DP800 steels. Elongated voids were more likely to form as a result
of decohesion of ferrite-ferrite interfaces in regions with long grain boundaries surrounded by
martensite particles. It was shown that strain incompatibility led to stress concentration in these
areas. The second mechanism observed was the formation of spherical voids in small ferrite
grains constrained between martensite particles. The high hydrostatic pressure found in this
region initiated void nucleation by the mechanism that was claimed to be decohesion of the

2
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

interface between ferrite and martensite. Sun et al [8] used microstructure modelling to study the
key factors influencing the failure mechanisms of DP-steels with different volume fractions. In
DP-steels with less than 15% of martensite, the growth and coalescence of pre-existing micro-
voids in the ferrite phase was shown to be the dominant cause of damage. However, at higher
volume fractions up to 40%, the incompatibility between hard martensite and soft ferrite signifi-
cantly influenced damage, whereas the pre-existing microvoids were no longer the main factor.
This paper examines the damage development in commercial DP1000 steels using both
local strain and stress analysis. The deformation of the microstructure was first measured
experimentally using DIC and the measured displacement values were then used as boundary
conditions for a microstructural FE model. In situ tensile tests were performed inside a SEM
chamber to observe the actual deformation of DP1000 microstructure and the subsequent
micrographs were analysed using DIC. 2D models were then generated from SEM images of
the imaged microstructure of DP1000 and stress values at damage locations were analysed.

2. Experimental procedure

The material used in this study is a commercial cold rolled uncoated DP1000 steel grade con-
sisting of 60% martensite (light regions) embedded in ferrite (dark regions) with approximate
average grain size of 7 μm as shown in figure 1(a). The microstructure in figure 1(a) shows a
contiguous martensite network that is relatively homogenous and has no banding in the roll-
ing direction. The material was provided in the form of 1.5 mm thick sheets. The chemical
composition is given in table 1.
The main aim of the experiment was to progressively follow the deformation of the micro-
structure at the surface of a DP1000 sample during tensile testing. A Deben Microtest ten-
sile stage with 5 kN maximum load capacity was used. Special dog bone specimens, shown
in figure 1(b), were designed to ensure specimens failed below the maximum allowed load
and extension of the tensile stage. A small 2   ×   2 mm gauge section was chosen in order to
make the observation of damage initiation easier by localising the deformation. Two sets of
specimens were manufactured in the rolling and along the transverse direction. The tests were
displacement controlled with a rate of 0.1 mm min−1 [6].
Before tensile testing, the DP1000 specimens were metallographically polished and then
etched with 5% Nital for 5 s to reveal the microstructure as shown in figure 1(a). The experi-
ments were run inside a CamScan MK II SEM chamber and interrupted at regular intervals
during the tensile tests until fracture to record secondary-electron micrographs of the defor-
mation history and damage development.
DIC was used for quantitative deformation analysis and local strain calculation using
LaVision 7.1 software [9]. The technique discretises the undeformed image into small inter-
rogation or subset windows, each having a unique pixel intensity array. A correlation algorithm
is used to track the windows in the deformed images and calculate displacement vectors at the
centre of each subset. Once these are known, in-plane strain values can be computed through
differentiation. A detailed description and explanation of the DIC technique can be found in
[10, 11]. The strain values were determined using the SEM images taken after each successive
loading step in order to obtain the full history of the strain field from undeformed configura-
tion up to fracture. Microstructural features have been used directly for the correlation, with-
out any filtering or image corrections. A reduced pass algorithm [9] was used starting from
12.5   ×   12.5 μm2 (64   ×   64 pixel2) interrogation windows for the first pass and reduced to
6.25   ×   6.25 μm2 (32   ×   32 pixel2) for the second pass with 50% overlap. An example of initial
and final interrogation windows and their respective overlap is shown in figure 1(a) with respect

3
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

Figure 1. (a) SEM image of the DP1000 microstructure with overlaid squares
representing the interrogation windows used for DIC analysis and (b) specimen
dimensions in mm.

Table 1. Weight percentage (wt%) chemical composition of the DP1000 steel.

C Mn Si Cr V Ni Nb
0.152 1.53 0.474 0.028 0.011 0.033 0.014

to the microstructure. This procedure gives an accuracy of 0.005 μm for the displacement
­vectors and about 0.3% for strain values [9]. This DIC procedure for computing strain distribu-
tions over areas of microstructures has been validated against an independent technique in [12].

3. Microstructure modelling

Microstructure simulation is used to study the observed damage in terms of stress state.
A MatLab [13] code developed by Chalon [14], creates an input file for Abaqus version 6.10
[15] using a 2D mesh of the microstructure based upon the SEM images taken in this work.
The code divides the image into subset windows and converts each subset into a square ele-
ment with four nodes. The linear quadrilateral element CPS4R was used in the simulations.
The code then assigns each element to either ferrite or martensite according to the grey inten-
sity level in the SEM image, after a threshold operation is used to convert the original image
into a black and white picture. Figure 2(a) shows an image of the generated model for the area
of interest in the SEM image of the undeformed DP1000 microstructure.
Another MatLab code was created to define the boundary conditions of the model in
the Abaqus input file. The boundary conditions for the analysed area were imported from
the DIC results with displacement values along the X and Y directions assigned to all nodes
of the modelled area. As a result, the simulation is expected to represent the actual deforma-
tion of the analysed area. The model assumes a perfectly cohesive interface between the two
microstructure constituents.

4
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

Figure 2. (a) Gray (ferrite) and white (martensite) microstructure model generated
from the SEM image in figures 1(b) and (b) flow curves of martensite (blue) and ferrite
phase (red) of DP1000.

Pure martensite and pure ferrite stress/strain curves were measured from strip fabricated
to have the chemical composition and microstructure of the individual constituents, i.e. low-
carbon ferrite and high-carbon martensite. The measured stress/strain curves of these two
materials were then inputted into the FE model. The local stress/strain response of ferrite and
martensite within the two-phase material is likely to differ from that measured on pure phase
specimens. Consequently, finite element simulations of the deforming microstructure have
been used to adjust these local flow curves by minimising the error between the averaged
modelling stress and the experimental true stress value.
Five deformed images were simulated for stages after yielding through to the ultimate ten-
sile strength point. The average stress of each state is calculated and compared to the applied
experimental true stress of the whole specimen. Averaging the microstructure stress fields can
be conducted using the following relation:
1
σ =
(1)
V V ∫
σ dV

σ is the average stress, V is the total volume of the microstructure model and σ is the stress
computed at every Gauss point in the model [16–18]. The model used here is 2D with plane
stress condition and unit thickness. The von Misses stress computed in every element was then
averaged according to equation (1).
Table 2 summarises the comparison between modelling results and experimental values.
A maximum error of 3.2% can be observed. This is relatively small and can be related to a
discrepancy between the model and the actual material in terms of microstructure constituent
properties or/and a 3D effect as the model was run under plane stress conditions.
Both the ferrite and martensite are considered here to have an elastic–plastic behaviour
with an isotropic hardening law. The sensitivity to crystal orientation and sub-surface mor-
phology on the calculated stresses were not included in the model and these assumptions may
affect the results as will be discussed later.
Figure 2(b) shows the adjusted flow curves of martensite and ferrite defined in the model.
The martensite strips fractured at an applied true strain of about 3.8%. However, results from
the literature have shown that the martensite phase in DP-steels can plastically deform to a
larger extent with measured local strain values larger than 10% [6]. Consequently, the stress/

5
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

Table 2. Comparison between experimental true stress and simulated average stress
values during the uniform elongation of the specimen.

Applied strain (%) 2 4 7 9 11

True stress (MPa) 1012 1076 1135 1168 1196
Model average stress (MPa) 980 1045 1104 1132 1167
Error (%) 3.2 2.9 2.7 3.1 2.5

strain curve for martensite was artificially extrapolated with the same slope of the curve as
that just before the measured data terminates. The elastic modulus values of 198 GPa and 182
GPa were used for ferrite and martensite respectively and a Poisson’s ratio value of 0.3 for
both phases. These values were calculated from the data acquired from tensile experiments on
martensitic and ferritic strips.

4. Results

Figure 3 presents the measured engineering tensile stress strain curves for the DP1000 mate-
rial tested in the rolling and transverse directions. There is little difference between the two
directions, which shows that there is a low level of anisotropy in the material. This correlates
well to the observation that the two phases are uniformly distributed in both directions with-
out any particular banding, as can be seen in the micrograph shown in figure 2(a). From the
data in figure 3, the yield strength is about 950 MPa and the ultimate tensile strength (UTS) is
approximately 1110 MPa, which is indicative that the material is a high yield type of DP-steel.
As a consequence of the small gauge length tensile specimen geometry used, the uniform
strain was 14% and the fracture strain 48%, both of which are almost a factor of five greater
than for a DP1000 steel tested using standard geometries. However, this gave the opportunity
to observe the development of microstructure deformation and damage in such high strength
steel grades that have relatively limited post-uniform elongation. The regular stress relax-
ations seen in the tensile curve here are due to the interruption of the test to acquire SEM
images of the deformed microstructure for subsequent DIC analysis.

4.1. Damage observation

The SEM images have been analysed in order to investigate the initiation and development
of damage in DP1000 steel specimens. Ductile failure usually involves void initiation, propa-
gation and coalescence. Void initiation in DP-steels can be created by two types of micro-
structure constituents: (i) martensite islands or (ii) non-metallic inclusions (NMI). NMI’s
are undesirable particles formed in the material during the steel making and casting process.
Figure 4 shows such an NMI at the centre of the field of view, surrounded by a characteristic
cavity that typically forms during specimen preparation as a consequence of chemical dissolu-
tion by polishing and etching media. The interpretation that this feature is a NMI is based on
this characteristic cavity, but also on how the particle behaved in brittle manner upon deforma-
tion and its similarity to other such particles that were found to contain aluminium and oxygen
using energy dispersive spectroscopy in the SEM as shown in figure 5.
At the early stages of the uniform deformation, after an applied specimen strain of 2% as
measured from the grip displacement, the NMI particle had already fractured and thus, was
the first microstructural feature to exhibit damage. Since the NMI fractured, it shows that the
surrounding cavity was only at the surface and the rest of the particle was indeed attached to
the surrounding metal. However, upon further macroscopic deformation, apart from enlarging

6
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

Figure 3. Stress–strain curves of DP1000 steels for specimens loaded parellel to the
rolling direction (red) and perpenducular to the rolling direction (blue).

Figure 4. Void nucleation and growth with related applied strain due to an NMI in the
material (the loading direction is shown with the red arrow on the left hand side).

of the surrounding surface cavity, no crack developed into the surrounding ferrite-martensite
microstructure. This suggests that in this case at least, the NMI was relatively innocuous.
Martensite is the main microstructure constituent in DP-steel that imparts strength to the
material. Figure 6 shows the progression in the void development near martensite islands as

7
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

Figure 5. (a) SEM image of a NMI and (b) energy dispersive spectroscopy analysis.

Figure 6. Spherical void nucleation as a result of martensite breaking and seperation

in DP1000 steels, the applied specimen strain is indicated underneath each image (the
loading direction is shown with the red arrow on the left hand side).

the applied specimen strain increased. Severe deformation occurred at a specimen strain value
of 32%, shown by the local extension of the ferrite-martensite interface at the location where
the martensite ultimately fractured. A crack then initiated at a small notch-like feature in the

8
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

martensite phase that was likely to have been a stress concentrator. The crack then propagated
through the martensite phase. After the failure of the martensite phase, a spherical void formed
as shown in figure 6 for when the applied specimen strain was 52%. At this stage the damage
had propagated into the ferrite phase adjacent to where the now divided martensite island was.
Figure 7 shows an example of three different areas in the microstructure where damage
developed as the applied specimen strain increased. These areas were chosen because damage
appeared first in these clearly deformed regions. Damage initiated at the interface between fer-
rite and martensite at applied specimen strain of 16%, which is just after the UTS is reached.
This damage then propagated through martensite islands until full separation at an applied
specimen strain of about 37%. The mechanism observed in figure 7 is representative of the
martensite failure observed at various positions in the microstructure of DP1000 during the
test.

4.2. Strain distribution

This section describes the strain field analysed using DIC over the microstructure. Figure 8(a)
shows the Eyy strain map (the y-axis corresponding to the tensile direction shown in the
figure) for an applied specimen strain of 16%. At this strain level, no microstructural damage
was observed and thus, it was chosen for further analysis because any voids or cracks would
make the DIC measurement results unreliable around the defect area. As can be seen from
figure 8(a), a maximum strain value of about 20% is observed in the large ferrite grain areas,
whereas the minimum values are found in the predominantly martensite regions, as would be
expected. In addition, strain bands orientated at 45o (dashed lines) with respect to the loading
direction (vertical in the figure) can be observed.
Figure 8(b) shows the distribution of strain values along the loading direction in both the
martensite and ferrite for the area outlined by the box in figure 8(a). The distributions indicate
that ferrite and martensite have deformed to similar degrees, with a slightly higher mean value
for the softer ferrite (9.2% as opposed to 8.6% in the martensite). However, the difference is
small and this might be owing to the high volume fraction of martensite in this material (about
60%). Standard deviation values of 2.4 for ferrite and 2.0 for martensite also show a similar
strain heterogeneity for both phases.

4.3. Microstructure simulation

In order to investigate stress distribution in relation to the fracture process of martensite

islands in DP1000 steel, the simulation results of the model shown in figure 2(a) were anal-
ysed. Figure 9(a) illustrates von-Mises stress results of ferrite and martensite in DP1000 for
the microstructure shown in figure 1(a). The modelled area is highlighted with a black box
in figure 8(a), for an applied specimen strain of 16%. Figure 9(b) shows the von Mises stress
distribution in martensite and ferrite from the results in figure 9(a). Unlike strain, the von
Mises stress distributions of martensite and ferrite are very different. As can be seen from
figure 9(b), stress values in martensite are about three times higher than those in ferrite. The
mean stress values are about 505 MPa and 1535 MPa for ferrite and martensite respectively.
A larger standard deviation of 14 is observed for stresses in the ferrite matrix as compared to a
standard deviation of 4 in martensite. This clearly shows that stress distribution is significantly
more heterogeneous in the softer phase.
With respect to damage analysis, martensite fracturing was clearly observed in three areas
of the region analysed with DIC (shown in figure 7) and consequently, these areas were chosen

9
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

Figure 7. Development of damage in the martensite of DP1000 with the increase of

applied specimen strain (%) (the loading direction is shown with the red arrow on the
right hand side).

Figure 8. (a) Eyy strain (%) map ( y-axis along the tensile direction shown by the white
arrow) and (b) distribution, over the analysed area of DP1000 at an applied specimen
strain of 16%. The two dashed lines in (a) show the strain bands at 45° with respect to
the loading direction.

for the simulations (figure 10). Again, the chosen state of deformation corresponded to an
applied specimen strain of 16%, as no damage was observed in the microstructure at that
stage.
The aim of the simulations was to study the local strain and stress state that initiates frac-
turing of the martensite through initiation at the interface as was observed experimentally.

10
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

Figure 9. (a) Von Mises stress results and (b) distribution, for microstructure modelling
of DP1000 at an applied strain of 16% in the highlighted area of figure 8(a).

Figure 10. Three FE models (bottom) generated from SEM images (top) to study the
stress state of martensite islands before the onset of cracking at the locations highlighted
with yellow lines.

Strain and stress levels shown in figure 11 have been set to show the strain along the loading
direction Eyy and the maximum principal stress distributions in the martensite only. At the
location of martensite cracking highlighted in figure 10 with yellow lines, the Eyy strain maps
in figure 11(a) show values ranging from 14 % in area 2 to 8.6 % in area 3, with therefore no
particular correlation between damage events and local strain values. However, as can be seen
from figure 11(c) for area 1 and area 3, the highest value of the maximum principal stress was
located where a crack appeared during the test (see figure 10). As for area 2, there seems to
be more than one location where a potential crack could have appeared according to the FE
results. Although a crack did appear at one of these locations (see figure 10), a 3D effect not

11
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

Figure 11. (a) E22 strain results (2-axis along the tensile direction, vertical in the images)
and (b) maximum principal stress results from the microstructure simulations of the
three areas of interest; Stress levels have been selected in (c) to highlight maximum
values and the correspondence with crack locations.

taken into account in the simulation might have been responsible for the location selection of
crack initiation. The values of maximum principal stress located in the martensite close to the
interface with ferrite were all remarkably similar, being 1771 MPa, 1670 MPa and 1722 MPa
for area 1, 2 and 3 respectively.

5. Discussion

Results from this work have shown that damage mechanisms in dual-phase steels are influ-
enced by martensite particles and to a lesser degree by inclusions. Avramovic-Cingara et al
[19] reported that a small number of voids was nucleated as a result of inclusion breaking or
decohesion with the matrix in DP600 steels at all strain levels. In that case the voids size was
relatively large and only contributed to the increase of void density of the DP-steel rather
than being the main failure mechanism. Figure 4 shows an early damage process due to the
presence of an inclusion at a small strain value of 2% with eventually the formation of a large
void at 16% applied specimen strain. However, in the case observed in this study, the inclu-
sion initiated void did not instigate fracture and played no significant role in the failure of the
specimen.
Damage initiated at the interface between the two phases, followed by martensite fractur-
ing was only observed at an applied specimen strain of 16%, as shown in figure 7. This is
in agreement with the work by Poruks et al [20] who investigated the interface strength and

12
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

nucleation strain for void formation due to different particles in steels. Their results show that
the strength and thus, nucleation strain, increased in the order of non-metallic particles, Fe3C
carbides and then martensite. This is in agreement with the results reported in this work with
voids nucleating around inclusions at low strain, while damage related to martensite islands
being observed at higher strain values. The size of the voids created by inclusions was larger
than that related to the fracture of martensite islands shown in figure 7, with the latter being
more commonly observed during the test. These observations seem to be consistent with find-
ings reported in Avramovic-Cingara [19], even though the specimen strain values cannot be
compared directly because of the different sample gauge dimensions used here.
Damage due to martensite regions fracturing has also been reported by Steinbrunner
et al [21], who claimed that it was the dominant void formation mechanism at strain of 5%
in the DP-steel materials they studied. This mechanism was also reported by Kadkhodapoure
et al [7]. They proposed decohesion of the ferrite/martensite interface as a void initiation
mechanism in their model. Avramovic-Cingara et al [19] suggested that decohesion between
martensite and ferrite was the dominant mechanism of voids nucleation at all strain levels.
A possible explanation for these discrepancies is that failure mechanisms are influenced by
different factors such as martensite volume fraction, microstructure morphology, chemical
composition and manufacturing conditions.
The strain map result in figure 8 is consistent with Ghadbeigi et al [6] who reported bands
of local strain orientated at around 45° with respect to the loading direction. Furthermore, the
similarity of the bell shape distributions of local strain values for both ferrite and martensite
shown in figure 8(b), with a slightly higher mean value in the ferrite than in the martensite, is
in agreement with the findings of Ghadbeigi et al [6] and Han et al [22]. This similarity has
been explained by Kang et al [4] who found that when the size ratio of ferrite islands to the
surrounding martensite islands is less than three, the deformation becomes similar for the two
phases, as was the case for the DP1000 steel investigated here.
Unlike strain distributions, the von Mises stress distributions in figure 9(b) showed more sig-
nificant difference between martensite and ferrite, not only in terms of magnitude as expected,
but also in terms of standard deviation. Martensite carries stresses up to 1550 MPa, which is
consistent with stress results reported by Ramazani et al [3, 23]. These authors reported von
Mises stress values up to 1700 MPa. However, a direct comparison is not possible because of
the difference in carbon contents and morphology between the investigated materials.
In this work, a nucleation criterion for martensite fracturing has been the focus of the
microstructural model. Damage in the ferrite was not observed in the analysed area of this
investigation, even though this mechanism has been seen on the surface of a specimen towards
the end of a tensile test (Ghadbeigi et al [6]). This is due to the fact that the centre of the speci-
men experiences higher stress triaxiality than the surface, which results in a smaller number
of voids forming at the surface. Void volume fractions measured using x-ray tomography in
DP-steel after necking by Maire et al [24] and Landron et al [25] indeed showed that the frac-
tion of porosity reached almost zero near the surface, while the maximum void concentration
was recorded at the centre of the specimen.
From the DIC and FE results, all strain values such as maximum principal strain, shear
strain and strain along the tensile direction, show no correlation between damage locations
and local strain values, as can be seen in figure 11(a). This could not be compared to published
results as similar studies could not be found in the literature. All stress components have
been analysed in the same manner. From the results of maximum principal stress distributions
shown in figure 11(c), it is speculated that there may be a correlation between damage location
and the value of maximum principal stress at the interface where damage starts. It is therefore

13
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

Figure 12. (a) EBSD map of a 75 μm  ×  85 μm for DP1000 steel and (b) Band slope
map identifying ferrite and martensite.

suggested that a critical maximum principal stress value of about 1700 MPa in the martensite
is sufficient to initiate a crack in the martensite.
This finding has important implications for the development of physically-based models
of damage development in DP-steels, as this initiation criterion can be used to initiate dam-
age sites in crack propagation models for the prediction of fracture of advanced high strength
steels. However, the actual nucleation stress value is likely to be highly dependent on several
factors such as the chemical composition of the microstructure constituents at the scale of
the microstructure, the volume fraction and spatial distribution of phases as well as crystal-
lographic orientation of grains.
The anisotropy of the material in terms of crystallographic orientations has been char-
acterised using electron-back-scattered-diffraction (EBSD) in a FEG-SEM Zeiss Sigma
Microscope. The sample was mechanically grinded and polished down to 0.05 μm (with
Colloida Silica). The step size was 0.3 μm, covering approximately a total area of 75 μm  ×  85
μm. Figure 12(a) shows the EBSD map of the analysed area, while figure 12(b) shows the
band slope map that was used to differentiate martensite from ferrite.
Instead of using the Image Quality map [26, 27], the band slope map was employed here
as it differentiates more effectively ferrite from near cubic, but heavily deformed, martensite
[28]. The Kikuchi bands during EBSD acquisition are sharper and clearer for the ferrite phase
compared to those for martensite. This is because the martensite phase contains a high density
of dislocations from the shear mechanism of the phase transformation and to a lesser extent
from the tetragonal distortion of the body-centred cubic lattice due to the high concentra-
tion of interstitial carbon [26]. A surface area fraction of 60% martensite and 40% ferrite
was estimated on the basis of partitioning using the band slope map for the analysed area.
A detailed analysis of the orientations within the two phases of the DP steel is shown in
figure 13. Figures 13(a) and (b) show the inverse pole figure (IPF) maps for ferrite and mar-
tensite respectively. The ϕ2  =  45° sections of the orientation distribution function (ODF) for
ferrite and martensite are shown in figures 13(c) and (d) respectively. The microtexture of
both ferrite and martensite is similar in terms of texture components located along the alpha-
fiber (RD//〈1 1 0〉) and gamma-fiber (ND//〈1 1 1〉) but the intensity is generally weaker in the
martensite phase (maximum ODF value of 4.5 times random as opposed to 9.8 times random
in the ferrite phase).

14
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

Figure 13. Texture measurements of undeformed DP1000 steel with (a) Inverse pole
figure map for ferrite, (b) for martensite, and (c) ϕ2  =  45° section of the ODF for ferrite
and(d) for martensite.

These results show a marked texture in both phases of the DP steel investigated in this
work, which are in line with EBSD measurements reported by Choi et al [26] (maximum ODF
values of 8.4 and 8.2 times random in ferrite and martensite respectively), even though the tex-
ture in the martensite phase is weaker in the present study. Stress distributions computed from
both a crystal plasticity FEM (CPFEM) and an isotropic elasto-plastic model used to simulate
the deformation of the microstructure of a DP980/1000 during a tensile test were compared
in Choi et al [26]. Results showed an increase of 14% for the maximum stress in martensite
after using a CPFE model while an increase of only 8% was recorded for the maximum stress
in the ferrite phase. Therefore, stress values computed in the microstructure of the two-phase
steel investigated in this work are likely to be inaccurate given the isotropic assumption made
in the model.
Apart from the effect of crystallographic orientation, the assumption of 2D plane stress
conditions, as assumed in most similar studies found in the literature (e.g. [29, 30]), given
the lack of knowledge about the geometry of the microstructure in the third dimension, is
another source of uncertainty for the computed stress values. Consequently, stress values
calculated in this work should be taken with caution. Despite these uncertainties, a critical
value of maximum principal stress distributions matching the location of crack nucleation in
martensite seems plausible from the results obtained in this work, but also from a physical
basis. Therefore, the proposed damage criterion for martensite is of particular value for the
modelling of martensite fracture in DP steels, even though more accurate stress calculations
could be considered by taking into account, for instance, the crystallographic orientations of
the phases.

15
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

A separate criterion for void nucleation in ferrite, likely based on a critical strain [5, 19],
could not be developed in this work as damage in that phase was not observed during the test.
However the approach developed in this work which closely combines DIC measurements
and finite element modelling of the deformation of microstructures offers a real opportunity
for the development of new insight into damage formation in DP steels.

6. Conclusion

The present research was designed to study and analyse damage mechanisms in DP1000 steels.
The results showed that voids nucleated at inclusions at an early stage of deformation, for an
applied specimen strain value as low as 2%. However, a more extensive damage mechanism
has been observed in this study for the failure of martensite islands, which initiated beyond
the UTS at the interface between ferrite and martensite. A new procedure combining experi-
mental results and finite element simulations of the microstructure with boundary conditions
directly imported from the DIC measurements has enabled the study of martensite fracture
initiation conditions. The results showed that a maximum principal stress threshold value of
about 1700 MPa in the martensite close to the interface with ferrite can initiate the failure of
martensite islands at locations observed during the in situ tensile testing of the investigated
DP1000 steel. Results obtained in this work at the micro-scale in DP1000 therefore provides
new insight for the understanding of damage development in Advanced High Strength Steels
and for the development of predictive physically-based models of the behaviour of both cur-
rent and next generation automotive steels.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank EPSRC (grant number EP/F023464/1) for financial support
and Tata Steel Europe, in IJmuiden, The Netherlands for providing the material for this study.
The authors also thank Dr Peter Korgul for his grateful help and support during this work. The
first author thanks Saudi Arabian Cultural Bureau, UK and Taibah University, Madinah for
sponsoring his research.

References

[1] Byun T S and Kim I S 1993 Tensile properties and inhomogeneous deformation of ferrite martensite
dual-phase steels J. Mater. Sci. 28 2923
[2] Sarwar M and Priestner R 1996 Influence of ferrite-martensite microstructural morphology on
tensile properties of dual-phase steel J. Mater. Sci. 31 2091
[3] Ramazani A, Mukherjee K, Prahl U and Bleck W 2012 Modelling the effect of microstructural
banding on the flow curve behaviour of dual-phase (DP) steels Comput. Mater. Sci. 52 46
[4] Kang J D, Ososkov Y, Embury J D and Wilkinson D S 2007 Digital image correlation studies for
microscopic strain distribution and damage in dual phase steels Scr. Mater. 56 999
[5] Ososkov Y, Wilkinson D S, Jain M and Simpson T 2007 In situ measurement of local strain
partitioning in a commercial dual-phase steel Int. J. Mater. Res. 98 664
[6] Ghadbeigi H, Pinna C, Celotto S and Yates J R 2010 Local plastic strain evolution in a high strength
dual-phase steel Mater. Sci. Eng. A Struct. Mater. 527 5026
[7] Kadkhodapour J, Butz A and Rad S Z 2011 Mechanisms of void formation during tensile testing in
a commercial, dual-phase steel Acta Mater. 59 2575
[8] Sun X, Choi K S, Soulami A, Liu W N and Khaleel M A 2009 On key factors influencing ductile
fractures of dual phase (DP) steels Mater. Sci. Eng. A Struct. Mater. 526 140
[9] LaVision. Davis Strain master Software 2001

16
Modelling Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 23 (2015) 085005 K Alharbi et al

[10] Sutton M A, Orteu J-J and Schreier H W 2009 Image Correlation for Shape, Motion and
Deformation Measurements Basic Concepts, Theory and Applications (New York: Springer)
[11] Bornert M et al 2009 Assessment of digital image correlation measurement errors: methodology
and results Exp. Mech. 49 353
[12] Ghadbeigi H, Pinna C and Celotto S 2012 Quantitative strain analysis of the large deformation
at the scale of microstructure: comparison between digital image correlation and microgrid
techniques Exp. Mech. 52 1483
[13] MATLAB 2010 The MathWorks I
[14] Chalon I 2004 Modelling of the microstructural deformation of duplex stainless steel during plane
strain compression Internal Report Department of Mechanical Engineering: The University of
Sheffield
[15] Simulia. Abaqus 6.10. 2010
[16] Kouznetsova V, Geers M G D and Brekelmans W A M 2002 Multi-scale constitutive modelling of
heterogeneous materials with a gradient-enhanced computational homogenization scheme Int.
J. Numer. Methods Eng. 54 1235
[17] Nemat-Nasser S and Hori M 1999 Micromechanics: Overall Properties of Heterogeneous Materials
(Amsterdam: Elsevier)
[18] Asgari S A, Hodgson P D, Yang C and Rolfe B F 2009 Modeling of advanced high strength steels
with the realistic microstructure-strength relationships Comput. Mater. Sci. 45 860
[19] Avramovic-Cingara G, Saleh C A R, Jain M K and Wilkinson D S 2009 Void nucleation and growth
in dual-phase steel 600 during uniaxial tensile testing Metall. Mater. Trans. 40A 3117
[20] Poruks P, Yakubtsov I and Boyd J D 2006 Martensite-ferrite interface strength in a low-carbon
bainitic steel Scr. Mater. 54 41
[21] Steinbrunner D L, Matlock D K and Krauss G 1988 Void formation during tensile testing of dual
phase steels Metall. Trans. 19 579
[22] Han Q H, Kang Y L, Hodgson P D and Stanford N 2013 Quantitative measurement of strain
partitioning and slip systems in a dual-phase steel Scr. Mater. 69 13
[23] Ramazani A, Schwedt A, Aretz A, Prahl U and Bleck W 2013 Characterization and modelling of
failure initiation in DP steel Comput. Mater. Sci. 75 35
[24] Maire E, Bouaziz O, Di Michiel M and Verdu C 2008 Initiation and growth of damage in a dual-
phase steel observed by x-ray microtomography Acta Mater. 56 4954
[25] Landron C, Bouaziz O, Maire E and Adrien J 2010 Characterization and modeling of void
nucleation by interface decohesion in dual phase steels Scr. Mater. 63 973
[26] Choi S H, Kim E Y, Woo W, Han S H and Kwak J H 2013 The effect of crystallographic orientation
on the micromechanical deformation and failure behaviors of DP980 steel during uniaxial
tension Int. J. Plast. 45 85
[27] Zaefferer S, Romano P and Friedel F 2008 EBSD as a tool to identify and quantify bainite and
ferrite in low-alloyed Al-TRIP steels J. Microsc. 230 499
[28] Zhou W and Wang Z L 2007 Scanning Microscopy for Nanotechnology: Techniques and
Applications (New York: Springer)
[29] Sun X, Choi K S, Liu W N and Khaleel M A 2009 Predicting failure modes and ductility of dual
phase steels using plastic strain localization Int. J. Plast. 25 1888
[30] Tasan C C, Diehl M, Yan D, Zambaldi C, Shanthraj P, Roters F and Raabe D 2014 Integrated
experimental-simulation analysis of stress and strain partitioning in multiphase alloys Acta
Mater. 81 386

17