奥氏体不锈钢焊缝中δ铁素体含量测量方法对比  

Comparision of δ ferrite content measurement methods in austenitic stainless steel weld

作　　者：李丹 何琨[1] 孙丹琦[1] 田大容 刘菊 柳月 LI Dan;HE Kun;SUN Danqi;TIAN Darong;LIU Ju;LIU Yue(Reactor Fuel and Material Key Laboratory,Nuclear Power Institute of China,Chengdu 610213,China)

机构地区：[1]中国核动力研究设计院反应堆燃料及材料重点实验室,成都610213

出　　处：《理化检验（物理分册）》2022年第2期40-44,共5页Physical Testing and Chemical Analysis(Part A:Physical Testing)

摘　　要：采用金相法、化学法和磁性法对308奥氏体不锈钢焊缝中δ铁素体含量(质量分数)进行了检测。结果表明:采用金相法中的网格数点法、网格截线法和八线法时,在500倍显微镜下测得δ铁素体含量均为7.6%,是较为可信的结果;采用化学法中的Schaeffler图法时,测得δ铁素体含量约为8.5%,和金相法的测量结果接近;采用磁性法测得的δ铁素体含量最低,仅为3.4%。3种测量方法各有优点和缺点,实际操作中可根据不同情况进行选择。The δ ferrite content(mass fraction) of 308 austenitic stainless steel weld was detected by metallographic method, chemical method and magnetic method. The results show that the content of δ ferrite measured under 500 times microscope was 7.6% by using the grid number point method, grid truncation method and eight line method in metallographic method, which was more credible. When the Schaeffler diagram method in the chemical method was adopted, the measured δ ferrite content was about 8.5%, which was close to the measurement results of the metallographic method. The δ ferrite content measured by magnetic method was the lowest, only 3.4%. The three measurement methods had their own advantages and disadvantages, which can be selected according to different situations in practice.

关 键 词：奥氏体不锈钢 Δ铁素体 金相法 化学法 磁性法 

分 类 号：TG142.25[一般工业技术—材料科学与工程] TG115.2[金属学及工艺—金属材料]