Characterization of the fatigue failure mechanisms in austenitic and high nitrogen austenitic stainless steels

The aim of this study was to compare the properties of an implant grade 21Cr-23Mn-1N nitrogen-stabilized stainless (HNS) steel, to 316L and 22Cr-13Ni-5Mn stainless steels with a long history of implant use. The HNS steel showed excellent tensile, corrosion, and corrosion fatigue properties. However, the fracture surfaces of the notched tensile, notched stress corrosion cracking (SCC), smooth corrosion fatigue, and notched corrosion fatigue samples in the HNS steel showed a mixed-mode fracture consisting of areas of brittle facets intermingled with typical ductile features. Mixed-mode fractures were not exhibited in the other two nickel-stabilized stainless steel alloys. Since a substantial number of implant failures occur due to fatigue, the differences shown in fatigue fracture morphology for the HNS steel were of particular interest. It was hypothesized that the fatigue crack initiation and/or propagation mechanisms may be different for the HNS steel, and lead to the unusual fracture morphologies shown for the austenitic material.;The current research set out to test this hypothesis, and compare the fatigue crack initiation and propagation mechanisms of 21Cr-23Mn-1N and 316L cold-worked implant grade steels. Electron backscattered diffraction (EBSD) techniques were used to analyze representative areas of the microstructure on the free surface of fatigue samples. Both low-cycle and high-cycle fatigue loading conditions were evaluated over a series of fatigue intervals for each alloy. Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) was also employed in order to determine the surface topography on the nanometer scale associated with representative surface deformation features. In addition the fracture surfaces of selected fatigue samples were examined using scanning electron microscopy (SEM) failure analysis techniques. The EBSD crack initiation and propagation data were associated with fracture morphology features shown in the SEM analysis.;Results from the EBSD analysis revealed former annealing twin boundaries to be a strongly preferred location for fatigue crack initiation in the 21Cr-23Mn-1N HNS alloy. Crack propagation was shown to typically follow a transcrystalline direction. Analysis of selected extended fatigue cracks suggested a mechanism involving preferential initiation along former annealing twin and grain boundaries followed by transcrystalline crack propagation to interconnect the previously initiated cracks. SEM failure analysis of the HNS alloy showed a large number of facets in the crack initiation regions of the fatigue fractures. The large number of brittle facets in the initiation region of the fatigue fracture surface agrees well with the preferential former annealing twin boundary crack initiation location shown in the EBSD analysis.;In Contrast, EBSD analysis of the 316L alloy showed transgranular slip markings along {111} planes to be the strongly preferred location for fatigue crack initiation. Crack propagation was also shown to typically follow a transcrystalline direction in this alloy. Analysis of selected extended fatigue cracks suggested a mechanism of preferential initiation along slip markings followed by transcrystalline crack propagation to interconnect the previously initiated cracks. SEM failure analysis of the 316L alloy showed relatively few facets, which also supported the EBSD results showing a preference for transgranular slip marking crack initiation.;AFM analysis revealed small extrusions due to dislocation pile-up along slip markings shown on the fatigue sample free surfaces of both alloys. The reduced heights of the extrusions compared to those shown previous studies on annealed alloys, was attributed to the degree of cold-working already present in the material prior to fatigue testing.;In conclusion, EBSD analysis revealed the preferential location of fatigue crack initiation for the two alloys to be very different. These differences in fatigue crack initiation locations explain the differences shown in fracture morphologies in the two alloy systems. Also the addition of EBSD and AFM analyses techniques to the more traditional SEM failure analysis was shown to provide a more complete understanding of the fatigue failures encountered in these two alloy systems. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)...