scholarly journals Gas atomized precursor alloy powder for oxide dispersion strengthened ferritic stainless steel

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joel Rieken
2015 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 264-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. F. Li ◽  
Z. J. Zhou ◽  
L. F. Zhang ◽  
L. W. Zhang ◽  
H. L. Hu ◽  
...  

1999 ◽  
Vol 39 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-182 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuuji Kimura ◽  
Setsuo Takaki ◽  
Shinichi Suejima ◽  
Ryuji Uemori ◽  
Hiroshi Tamehiro

2019 ◽  
Vol 267 ◽  
pp. 403-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elodie Vasquez ◽  
Pierre-François Giroux ◽  
Fernando Lomello ◽  
Aziz Chniouel ◽  
Hicham Maskrot ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 93
Author(s):  
Dharmalingam Ganesan ◽  
Prabhukumar Sellamuthu ◽  
Konda Gokuldoss Prashanth

The present article investigates the fabrication of oxide dispersion strengthened (ODS) ferritic stainless steel (FSS). Three different ODS alloys with three different Al contents were fabricated, where the presence of Al-based oxides play a crucial role in determining the size of the oxide particles. Due to Ostwald ripening, the samples with Al show coarser oxide particles compared to the alloy without Al, which hampers the density of the fabricated samples and, hence, have reduced hardness levels. The present results suggest that the composition of the oxide present in ODS plays a crucial role in determining the properties of these samples.


2013 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zbigniew Oksiuta ◽  
Ewa Och

Abstract The paper presents results of the corrosion resistance of mechanically alloyed oxide dispersion strengthened 14% Cr ferritic stainless. The oxide dispersion strengthened steel was prepared by means of the powder metallurgy route that consists of mechanical alloying of a pre-alloyed argon atomized steel powder (Fe-14Cr-2W-0.3Ti) with 0.3 Y2O3 (wt%), followed by HIPping at 1150°C and annealing at 850°C for 1 h. The density of ODS ferritic steel after consolidation was about 99.0% of theoretical alloy density. The potentiodynamic corrosion tests were performed for 1h and 24 h of material exposure in a physiological saline solution. For comparison the 316 LV austenitic stainless steel was also examined. The obtained results revealed that both materials were in a passive stage, however the lower current corrosion density was measured for 316 LV steel. On the contrary, the austenitic stainless steel exhibited unstable chemical processes at the passive region. On the surface of both materials localized pitting corrosion was observed with different morphology of the cavities. A broken oxide scale with poor adhesion to the ferritic steel matrix with large number of density of localized corrosion attack was observed on the surface of the ODS steel.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document