JMEPEG (2017) 26:4890–4901 ASM International

DOI: 10.1007/s11665-017-2951-9 1059-9495/$19.00

Distortion Mechanisms During Carburizing

and Quenching in a Transmission Shaft
Ujjal Tewary, Goutam Mohapatra, and Satyam S. Sahay

(Submitted April 13, 2017; in revised form August 20, 2017; published online September 27, 2017)

Distortion control during industrial carburizing and quenching operation of precision transmission com-
ponents is of utmost importance due to their direct impact on performance, such as efficiency, noise and
vibrations. The importance of controlling various heat treatment process parameters for mitigating dis-
tortion is well accepted, but their specific influence on mechanisms is less understood. In the present work,
an integrated finite element-based model is used to simulate gas carburizing and quenching operation on a
typical transmission shaft. Investigation is carried out on the effect of raw materials, carburizing and
quenching process parameters to predict, analyze and minimize distortion. The effect of phase transfor-
mation and generation of thermal strain during heating and cooling stage of heat treatment is investigated,
and the mechanisms of bending, diameter and length distortion of a shaft are analyzed. The displacive
nature of transformation of bainite at higher temperature with its inherent large shear component of
deformation was identified to be responsible for bending distortion in a shaft. Bainitic transformation,
martensitic transformation and thermal strains developed during quenching cause volume expansion which
leads to diameter expansion and lesser length shrinkage. Finally, bending distortion of a shaft and bore
distortion of a gear are contrasted, both in terms of mechanisms and distortion control strategies.

Chemistry variation in commercial grade steel, even within the

Keywords distortion, finite element modeling, gas carburizing,
gear, heat treatment, phase transformation, quenching,
shaft, strain, stress
1. Introduction
Carburizing and quenching are known to improve the
mechanical properties of transmission components. The case
hardened improves the surface durability, fatigue and wear
resistance, while the core gives toughness. However, the
associated manufacturing challenge is the part distortion during
carburizing operation. Distortion has a significant cost impact,
because distorted components often need to be straightened or
hard-machined after heat treatment or sometimes scrapped if
the dimensions are far from accepted tolerances. The transmis-
sion efficiency as well as noise and vibration performance of
the assembly is adversely impacted due to distortions during
heat-treating operations.
Distortion in the transmission components, either shape or
size distortion, is a complex interplay of various parameters of
the entire manufacturing process chain, including component
design (Ref 1, 2), alloy content of the material or inhomo-
geneity (Ref 3-7), hardenability of the material (Ref 1, 7, 8),
normalizing or pretreatment process (Ref 1, 7, 9, 10),
machining parameters (Ref 11), carburizing process and its
parameters (Ref 6, 12-14), loading condition of the parts in the
furnace (Ref 5, 9), quenching method, quenching parameters
and quenching direction (Ref 9, 14-17).
Ujjal Tewary, Goutam Mohapatra, and Satyam S. Sahay, Asia
Technology Innovation Center, John Deere India Pvt. Ltd., Pune,
India. Contact e-mail: mohapatragoutam@johndeere.com.
specification limit, could result in significant variations in the
mechanical properties and product performance (Ref 8, 18). The
ovality of a gear bore had been shown to get reduced by
controlling the chemistry variations within specification limit of
the alloy. By reducing the hardenability, within specification limit,
there had been substantial reduction in the distortion variation as
well as absolute distortion levels (Ref 8). Carburizing parameters,
like boost and diffusion temperature and time, equalization
temperature and time are often used to control distortion in
components (Ref 14). Severity of oil and water quenchant is
known to influence distortion because of their influence on the
phase transformation temperature as well as quench severity.
Mathematical models have been used to simulate various
manufacturing processes. These tools were used, often, to
leverage design process cycle and optimize an industrial
operation without significant plant trials. An integrated finite
element (FE) analysis-based model was used successfully to
predict temperature profile, microstructure evolution, residual
stresses, hardness and distortion in a component during
carburizing and quenching operation (Ref 3, 8, 15, 19-27).
Such a tool can be leveraged to understand the effect of various
process parameters on distortion of an engineering component.
Majority of the work, till now, was focused on the
engineering aspect of the role of various carburizing and
quenching process parameters on distortion. By controlling
various process parameters, distortion was controlled to a large
extent, if not totally eradicated. Mechanism of quench distor-
tion for cylinder (Ref 28-30), shaft (Ref 16) and ring (Ref 30)
had been very well explained. However, the role of various heat
treatment process parameters and their impact on mechanism of
distortion is often neglected. This work is toward understanding
such mechanism to develop strategies for better distortion
control in the transmission components.
In the present work, an integrated finite element (FE)-based
model was used to simulate gas carburizing and quenching

4890—Volume 26(10) October 2017 Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

operation. The role of raw materials, various carburizing and
quenching process parameters—hardenability, equalization
time during carburizing cycle, and quench oil bath temperature
during quenching cycle—and its influence on understanding
the mechanism of distortion were investigated. These process
variables are easier to control by a heat treat engineer working
with a carburizing furnace. The role of phase transformation,
from austenite to various phases which are stable at lower
temperature, and generation of thermal strains, during heating
and cooling cycle of heat treatment, were rigorously analyzed.
Finally, the contrasting effect of hardenability on bending
distortion of a shaft and bore distortion of a gear is discussed.
2. Material and Method
The investigation was carried out on a typical transmission
shaft (Fig. 1a) having 550 mm length. The shaft has a step-
down diameter with maximum diameter of 110 mm and
minimum diameter of 37 mm. The material was a SAE
20MnCr5 steel grade whose chemical composition range is
shown in Table 1a. An integrated finite element (FE) analysis-
based model was employed to simulate the industrial gas
carburizing and quenching operation. The model simulates the
evolution of the transient temperature, carbon composition,
microstructure evolution, displacement, strain and stress during
furnace heating, carburizing and quenching. The geometry,
materials parameters and process parameters of carburizing and
quenching were the inputs to the model. The model predicts the
carbon profile, phases, hardness, stress, strain and displacement
(distortion; Fig. 2) (Ref 23). The simulation tool used standard
kinetics for the computation of solute diffusion, microstructure
evolution, hardness, quenching phase evolution, directional
quenching, three-dimensional stress tensor, and strain and
displacement estimation (Ref 8).
Phase transformation model developed by Kirkaldy was used
to estimate austenite to ferrite, pearlite, bainite and martensite
transformations. The transformation model is shown in Eq 1
dX
¼ BðG; T ÞX m ð1  X Þp ðEq 1Þ
dt
where X is the volume fraction of the phases, B is an effec-
tive rate coefficient, G is the austenite grain size, m and p are
Fig. 1 (a) Top figure shows an undistorted shaft (before carburizing). Bottom figure shows a distorted one (after the shaft cools down from
quenching cycle). The shaft bends, diameter expands, and length shrinks. l and d are the initial length and diameter; l¢ and d¢ are the final
dimensions after distortion. (b) Schematic representation of how bending distortion of a shaft is calculated. B¢P is the amount of bending distor-
tion; d¢  d is the amount of diameter distortion/expansion (will be positive); l¢  l is the amount of length distortion/shrinkage (will be negative)
Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
the semiempirical coefficients and T is the temperature (Ref
31-34). The hardness of steel at any location was estimated
based on phase fractions from Eq 1, hardness of phases and
use of rule of mixture (Ref 35). A transient three-dimensional
diffusion analysis was run within the FE-based framework to
compute the carbon concentrations as a function of carbon
content in the base metal and gas chamber as a function of
time. The diffusion of carbon in iron can be described by the
FickÕs second law:
  
@C @ @C
¼ D ðEq 2Þ
@t @X @X
The three-dimensional stress and strain tensor and displace-
ment are computed through nonlinear analysis in a coupled
manner to the microstructure model. The models were exten-
sively validated with the benchmark literature problems as
well as actual components (Ref 36).
During case carburizing operation, surface gets hardened
and core remains tough. The solute diffuses from the surface to
the core, which results in a significant solute gradient from the
surface to the core of the component. In the FE-based
framework, the thermal, diffusion, phase transformation, stress
and strain differential equations were solved at each integration
point of the element. Hence, spatial resolution near the surface
was kept more than the core. A finer mesh near the surface and
relatively coarser mesh near the core were used. Hex8 element
was used to mesh the shaft. At the surface, the spatial resolution
was about 0.2 mm, and near the core, it was 2 mm. This helped
to reduce the computational time considerably.
In the carburizing process, the shaft was carburized by
heating to 940 C, boost step at a carbon potential of 1.05% for
8.5 h, diffusion step with a carbon potential of 0.9% for 2.25 h
followed by equalization at 840 C for a specified time and
finally oil quenching.
In this investigation, it was of interest to know the effect of
raw materials, carburizing and quenching process parameters
on the distortion of a shaft. To understand the mechanism of
distortion by the effect of raw materials, hardenability was
chosen as a single and measurable parameter. Two levels of
hardenability were chosen—hardenability ÔLÕ and hardenability
ÔH.Õ Hardenability ÔLÕ is the SAE 20MnCr5 grade steel with all
elements in the lower limit. Hardenability ÔHÕ is the SAE
20MnCr5 grade steel with all elements in the upper limit (Ref
Volume 26(10) October 2017—4891
 Chemistry specification range, wt.%
8), as shown in Table 1b. The last row of the table shows the

High—H
Chemistry/hardenability—H
Table 1 (a) Alloy chemistry specification range for 20MnCr5 grade steel, (b) two levels of alloy chemistry specification of 20MnCr5 grade steel, (c) two levels of car-

90
105
ideal critical diameter indicating hardenability of the material.
The ideal critical diameter was calculated from its chemical
composition and prior austenitic grain size, which was taken as

0.22

82.83
per ASTM 7 (Ref 37). In the integrated FEM model, the effect

1.3
1.4
0.17-0.22
of composition change was incorporated by changing the

1.0-1.3
1.1-1.4
relevant kinetics. Additionally, equalization time was chosen
from the carburizing stage and quench oil bath temperature
from the quenching stage. The model considered the heat
transfer coefficient of the quench oil to model the heat
extraction from the component. The heat transfer coefficient
of the quench oil was assumed to be constant in this work.
Table 1c shows the two levels (low ÔLÕ and high ÔHÕ) of the
carburizing and quenching parameters.
The shaft distorts in three distinct ways. It has a tendency to
bend; the diameter changes; and length changes as well.
Figure 1(a) shows the exaggerated figure of bending, expansion
of diameter and shrinkage in length of a shaft. Figure 1(b)
demonstrates, schematically, how bending distortion was
calculated. The line shows the central axis of the shaft. A, B
and C represent the original position of the central axis of the
shaft before heat treatment. Locations A and C are at the two
extremes of the shaft. Location B was chosen where the
diameter is maximum. The central axis of the shaft moves to A¢,
B¢ and C¢, respectively, after heat treatment and quenching
operation. This happens because the shaft bends and its
diameter and length change after heating and cooling cycle.
Low—L

Bending distortion was calculated from the perpendicular

33
65
burizing (equalization time) and quenching (quench oil bath temperature) process parameters

distance between point B¢ and line A¢C¢ (length B¢P). Change

Chemistry/hardenability—L

in length was calculated as the difference between the lengths

after and before heat treatment (A¢C¢–AC). Similarly, change in
diameter was calculated as the difference between the final and
original diameters (d¢  d from Fig. 1a).
0.17

41.10
1.0
1.1

3. Results and Discussion

In this work, the role of hardenability, carburizing and

quenching process parameters for different types of distortion
of a shaft was examined. Table 2 summarizes the simulation
results for the effect of hardenability, equalization time (chosen
as a process parameter during the carburizing cycle) and
quench oil bath temperature (during the quenching cycle) on
bending, diameter and length distortion.
Higher (ÔHÕ) hardenability material is less prone to bending
and length distortion, but more prone to diameter distortion.
Higher (ÔHÕ) quench oil bath temperature gives more bending
and diameter distortion, but less shrinkage in length. Equaliza-
tion time does not show significant effect on bending, diameter
and length distortion.
The effect of phase transformation and generation of thermal
strain during heating and cooling stage was investigated, and
Quench oil bath temperature (C)

the mechanism of bending, diameter and length distortion was

analyzed.
Equalization time (min)

3.1 Bending Distortion

Alloying element

Alloying element

Bending distortion of a shaft was calculated according to

Fig. 1(b). To understand the mechanism of bending distortion,
Parameters

two random nodes were chosen—node D and node E—near the

DI (mm)

axis of the shaft (refer Fig. 3a and b). As the shaft dips
vertically into the quench oil bath, node D (toward the lower
Mn

Mn
Cr

Cr
C

4892—Volume 26(10) October 2017 Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

 part of the shaft) dips first compared to node E (toward the

Bainite + Martensite phase fraction

upper part). The net displacement in the x- and y-direction of

Table 2 Summary of the results of the effect of hardenability, equalization time and quench oil bath temperature on bending, diameter and length distortion of a
node D relative to node E was calculated, and this is a metric of
the bending of the central axis of the shaft. The net
displacement was calculated by square root of the displacement

Reason
in the x- and y- direction. We will consider this metric to

Length distortion
understand the mechanism of bending. Figure 4 shows the

Thermal strain
overall displacement of node D relative to node E (in the x- and
y-direction) during carburizing and quenching cycle. The inset
figure shows the displacement during the duration of the
quench.

Not significant …
Before the quenching begins, the relative movement of node
Amount, mm

D is more in ÔHÕ hardenability material compared to ÔLÕ

ÔLÕ represents lower level and ÔHÕ represents higher level of respective process parameters value. The table summarizes the reason for various types of distortion
hardenability material (Fig. 4) and this is due to the difference
in prior microstructure of the samples before carburizing
Bainite + Martensite phase fraction 0.991
0.818
0.991
0.852
begins. During and after quenching, relative movement of node
D in ÔLÕ hardenability material catches up and passes that of ÔHÕ
hardenability material. This is prominent during the time period
53587-53620 s. Beyond 53620 s, the slope of two lines is
almost parallel.
The relative movement of node D is similar irrespective of
the quench oil bath temperature, till the carburizing cycle
Reason

(Fig. 4). This is because both the materials have similar

Diameter distortion

hardenability and carburizing process parameters. During and

Thermal strain

after quenching, relative movement of node D is greater when

the shaft is quenched at higher temperature.
3.1.1 Effect of Hardenability. To understand the effect
of hardenability on bending distortion of a shaft, two different
Not significant –

hardenability materials were chosen (ÔLÕ and ÔHÕ). Both the

samples undergo similar carburizing and quenching cycle
Amount, mm

(equalization time of 33 min and quenching at 65 C temper-

ature). Bending distortion measurements were made after the
Bainite phase fraction 0.223
0.230
Bainite phase fraction 0.223
0.231

samples were cooled down to room temperature. Bending

distortion is larger for ÔLÕ hardenability material (Table 2).
During the early stage of quenching, in Fig. 4, the ÔL hardÕ
curve catches up and passes that of ÔH hardÕ curve and this is
the reason for higher bending in ÔLÕ hardenability material. To
Reason

understand this behavior, investigation was carried out on

Bending distortion

how nodes near the central axis of the shaft (nodes D and E)
and near the surface (for example, nodes D1 and E1) move
independently during and after the quenching period (for
Not significant …

nodes location, refer Fig. 3a and b). As case carburizing is a

surface phenomenon, it was important to investigate the
Amount, mm

surface to know how it influences the center of the

component.
0.077
0.012
0.077
0.094

Figure 5(a) shows the temperature and displacement, and

Fig. 5(b) shows the phase fraction distribution at node D in ÔLÕ
and ÔHÕ hardenability material. Transformation of austenite to
H (82.63 mm)
L (41.10 mm)

H (105 C)

H (90 min)

ferrite, pearlite and bainite is shown in the graph. There was no

L (33 min)
Level

L (65 C)

formation of martensite at node D. As temperature falls during

and after quenching, austenite first transforms into ferrite. It
stabilized within seconds, and then, rest of the austenite
transforms into pearlite and bainite. In Fig. 5(a), the lines show
Chemistry/process parameters

the displacement of node D for ÔLÕ hardenability and ÔHÕ

Quench oil bath temperature

hardenability material. Only x-direction displacement was

considered for illustration. Y-direction displacement gave
similar graph. The displacement lines are divided into three
regions—regions I, II and III (Fig. 5a).
Equalization time
Hardenability

Region I: negative slope (53580-53587 s). The displacement

falls during this period as quenching begins.
shaft

Region II: positive steep slope (53587-53620 s). In addition,

the slope of line ÔLÕ is high compared to line ÔH.Õ

Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance Volume 26(10) October 2017—4893

Fig. 2 Integrated finite element-based carburizing and quenching model
Fig. 3 (a) A transmission shaft. Quenching direction is with thicker section going first into the quench bath. Node D and node E are chosen
arbitrarily near the axis of the shaft; node B is near the axis of the shaft and at maximum diameter; node Bx+ is on the surface and on the +x-
axis; node B2 is 20 mm from the axis of the shaft; nodes A and C are at the edge and near the axis of the shaft. (b) Cross section of the shaft,
showing nodes D, E, D1 and E1
Region III: positive less steep slope (beyond 53620 s). In
addition, slope of lines ÔLÕ and ÔHÕ is almost parallel.
To understand the displacement graphs in these three regions,
phase transformation near the surface was considered, as
surface gets influenced most by the carburizing operation.
Figure 5(c) and (d) shows the temperature, displacement and
phase fraction of node D1 in ÔLÕ and ÔHÕ hardenability material.
Node D1 is situated about 0.67 mm from the surface (Fig. 3),
whereas the case depth in ÔLÕ and ÔHÕ hardenability ranges from
1.0 to 1.7 mm. When quenching begins, the displacement of
node D1 increases (displaces away from the axis of the shaft)
for few seconds and then falls continuously. The lines (Fig. 5c)
show the temperature at node D1 during and after quenching
for ÔLÕ and ÔHÕ hardenability material. The temperature lines for
both hardenability materials coincide. As quenching begins, the
surface temperature falls drastically and this contracts the
surface (the surface moves closer to the axis of the shaft). The
initial rise in the displacement lines is being seen to depend on
the amount of mass present below the nodes D–D1 (Fig. 3a). It
had been seen that this rise is more for node E1 (not illustrated
here).
Figure 5(c) and (d) shows that the displacement of node D1
is not influenced by any phase transformation at that particular
node. In fact, phase transformation near the surface dictates
4894—Volume 26(10) October 2017
how nodes are displaced closer to the center of the shaft. At
node D1 (Fig. 5d), at about 53585 s austenite starts transform-
ing to bainite. The amount of bainitic transformation is more in
ÔLÕ hardenability material compared to ÔHÕ hardenability mate-
rial. Also note that austenite transformed to bainite between
750 and 550 K. Austenite transformed to martensite at
53630 s and between 500 and 450 K. The amount of
martensite phase fraction is more in ÔLÕ hardenability material.
This is linked with the greater amount of bainite formation in
lower hardenability material. The formation of bainite creates
ferrite subunits (sheaves)–austenite interphases and resulted in
concentration gradient which accelerates martensite transfor-
mation kinetics. In addition, one can see the shape of the
martensite transformation kinetics is changed, becoming less
sharp in comparison with high hardenability grade. This present
simulation outcome is consistent with the similar previous
observation (Ref 38).
It is well established in the literature that phase transforma-
tion occurs in two main ways: the reconstructive mechanism
and the displacive mechanism. The reconstructive transforma-
tion involves uncoordinated diffusion of all of the atoms which
leads to substantial volumetric strains which are mostly
isotropic. The displacive transformations involve a combination
of a shear on the habit plane and a dilatational strain which is
directed normal to the habit plane. This transformation leads to
Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
Fig. 4 Displacement of node ÔDÕ relative to node ÔEÕ during carburizing and quenching process (a) in low (ÔLÕ) hardenability material and in
low (ÔLÕ) quench oil bath temperature (QT); (b) in high (ÔHÕ) quench oil bath temperature (QT); and (c) in high (ÔHÕ) hardenability material. The
inset figure shows the displacement curves during quenching stage
an invariant plane strain (IPS) as it leaves the habit plane
undistorted and unrotated. The invariant plane strain has a large
shear component, and the transformed product forms plates
which minimize the elastic strain in the austenite phase
(Table 3).
Bainitic and martensitic transformation occurs by displacive
mechanism. This causes a large deformation because of its
inherent large shear component. In addition, bainitic transfor-
mation occurs at higher temperature compared to martensitic
transformation. Because of the higher transformation temper-
ature of bainite, the deformation of the shaft is significantly
large (Ref 39). In ÔLÕ hardenability material, since the
transformation starts at higher temperature along with consid-
erable higher amount of bainite (21% for ÔLÕ and 3% for ÔHÕ
hardenability material), slope is higher in region II (of Fig. 5a)
compared to ÔHÕ hardenability material.
In Fig. 5(a), the displacement of node D decreases for few
second (7 s). The possibility of this negative slope might be
due to the fall in temperature near the surface which gets
influenced near the center, as there is no phase transformation
during this time. The rise in displacement lines in region II does
not start immediately when bainite starts to form near the
surface (node D1 in Fig. 5d). There is few seconds lag in the
rise of displacement lines, which is around 3 s. The displace-
ment lines of ÔLÕ and ÔHÕ hardenability materials are almost
parallel in region III. Formation of martensite near the surface
at relatively low temperature (compared to bainitic transforma-
tion) (node D1 in Fig. 5d) gives a continuously increasing
curve in region III. However, this does not cause any slope
change in region III between ÔLÕ and ÔHÕ hardenability materials.
Similar analysis for temperature, displacement and phase
fraction distribution at nodes E and E1 showed similar graphs
as that of Fig. 5 (not illustrated here).
Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
The steeper slope in region II, in Fig. 5(a), is responsible for
higher amount of bending in ÔLÕ hardenability material. The
steeper slope is due to bainite formation (near the surface) at
higher temperature and its inherent large shear component of
deformation (Fig. 5d). There is a very small window at the start
of the quenching stage (stage II) that requires precise control to
minimize distortion. On the contrary, bore distortion in a gear
can be reduced by lowering the hardenability of the material
(Ref 8).
3.1.2 Effect of Quench Oil Bath Temperature. To
understand the effect of quench oil bath temperature on
bending distortion of a shaft, two similar hardenability
materials (ÔLÕ hardenability material with DI of 41.10 mm)
were quenched at two different quench oil bath temperature
(ÔL,Õ 65 C, and ÔH,Õ 105 C). All other process parameters were
kept similar (equalization time of 33 min). Bending distortion
measurements were made after the samples were cooled down
to room temperature. The shafts bend more when the quenching
was carried out at higher temperature (ÔHÕ) (Table 2).
During the early stage of quenching, in Fig. 4, the slope of
ÔH quench-tempÕ curve is greater than ÔL quench-tempÕ curve.
To understand this behavior, similar nodes were chosen near
the central axis of the shaft (nodes D and E) and near the
surface (nodes D1 and E1). Similar analysis of temperature,
displacement and phase fraction was carried out. Displacement
lines of node D have steeper slope in region II for higher
quench oil bath temperature (Fig. 6a). This steeper slope is
responsible for higher bending. The steeper slope is due to the
higher amount of bainite formation near the surface (D1) for
higher quench oil bath temperature (Fig. 6b).
3.1.3 Effect of Equalization Time. To understand the
effect of equalization time on bending distortion of a shaft, two
similar hardenability materials (ÔLÕ hardenability material with
Volume 26(10) October 2017—4895
Fig. 5 Effect of hardenability on bending distortion: (a) plot of displacement (in x-direction) and temperature during quenching stage, at node
D (near center). The curve is divided into three regions I, II and III, (b) distribution of phase fraction during quenching stage, at node D, (c) plot
of displacement (in x-direction) and temperature during quenching stage, at node D1 (near surface), (d) distribution of phase fraction during
quenching stage, at node D1

Table 3 Shear strain (s) and dilatational strain (d) component of various phases
Transformation Mechanism Shape change s d Morphology

Pearlite R Volume change 0 0.03 Spherical colonies

Widmanstatten ferrite D Invariant plane strain 0.36 0.03 Thin plates
Bainite D Invariant plane strain 0.22 0.03 Thin plates
Acicular ferrite D Invariant plane strain 0.22 0.03 Thin plates
Martensite D Invariant plane strain 0.24 0.03 Thin plates
The value will vary slightly as function of lattice parameters and details of crystallography. D and R denote displacive and reconstructive mechanisms
of phase transformation [adapted from Ref 39]

DI of 41.10 mm) were carburized under similar conditions,
except at two different equalization time (ÔL,Õ 33 min, and ÔH,Õ
90 min). Quench oil bath temperature (65 C) was kept similar
for the two samples. Bending distortion measurements were
made after the samples were cooled down to room temperature.
Equalization time does not have significant effect on bending
distortion of a shaft (Table 2).
To understand the mechanism, similar nodes were consid-
ered near the axis of the shaft—node D and node E—and near
the surface—node D1 and node E1. Similar analysis was
carried out. The phase fraction, temperature and displacement
with time were calculated at these nodes. No difference in the
phase fraction distribution was found irrespective of the
equalization time (not illustrated here).
3.2 Diameter Distortion
Diameter distortion of a shaft was calculated according to
Fig. 1(a). The diameter of a shaft expands during carburizing
and quenching operation. To understand the mechanism of

4896—Volume 26(10) October 2017 Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

Fig. 6 Effect of quench oil bath temperature (QT) on bending distortion: (a) plot of displacement (in x-direction) and temperature during
quenching stage, at node D (near center). The displacement curve divided into three regions—I, II and III, and (b) distribution of phase fraction
during quenching stage, at node D1 (near surface)

Fig. 7 Effect of hardenability on diameter distortion of a shaft. Phase fraction distribution along the diameter of the shaft (node B to node Bx+)
in low (ÔLÕ) and high (ÔHÕ) hardenability materials. The inset figure shows the phase distribution near the surface. The amount of bainite and
martensite phase fraction in ÔHÕ is greater than in ÔLÕ

diameter distortion, the formation of the final phase fraction
along the diameter of the shaft was considered. Two
nodes—node B (near the central axis of the shaft) and node
Bx+ (on the surface)—were chosen for investigation (Fig. 3).
3.2.1 Effect of Hardenability. The expansion of diame-
ter of a shaft is greater in ÔHÕ hardenability material compared to
ÔLÕ hardenability material (Table 2). Figure 7 shows the
distribution of phase fraction—when the samples were cooled
down to room temperature after quenching cycle—along the
diameter of the shaft. Note the amount of bainite and martensite
phase fraction in ÔLÕ and ÔHÕ hardenability material. The higher
amount of bainite and martensite in ÔHÕ hardenability material
leads to larger diameter expansion.
3.2.2 Effect of Quench Oil Bath Temperature. The
diameter of a shaft expands more when it is quenched in higher
quench oil bath temperature (Table 2). To understand the
mechanism, the formation of the final phase fraction along the
diameter of the shaft was again considered.
Figure 8 shows the phase fraction and displacement/distor-
tion distribution along the diameter of the shaft, when it is cooled
down to room temperature after quenching cycle. The inset
figure shows the distribution near the surface of the shaft. Till
50 mm from the central axis of the shaft, bainite phase fraction
is higher with higher quench oil bath temperature. Overall (till
55 mm), bainite phase fraction was measured to be similar
irrespective of the quench oil bath temperature. Martensite phase

Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance Volume 26(10) October 2017—4897

Fig. 8 Effect of quench oil bath temperature (QT) on diameter distortion. Displacement/distortion and phase fraction distribution along the
diameter of the shaft (node B to node Bx+) in low (ÔLÕ) and high (ÔHÕ) quench oil bath temperature. The inset figure shows the distribution near
the surface

Fig. 9 (a) Temperature and displacement (in x-direction) of node Bx+ in low (ÔLÕ) and high (ÔHÕ) quench oil bath temperature (QT) during and
post-quenching. (b) Temperature and displacement (in x-direction) of node B2 in low (ÔLÕ) and high (ÔHÕ) quench oil bath temperature during and
post-quenching

fraction is higher when the quench oil bath temperature is lower.
However, diameter expansion is higher with higher quench oil
bath temperature. This anomaly cannot be explained with the
phase fraction distribution along the diameter of the shaft.
The displacement curves in Fig. 8 show that till 30 mm
from the axis of the shaft the displacement is approximately
same irrespective of the quench oil bath temperature. Beyond
30 mm, the displacement is high when the shaft is quenched
in higher quench oil bath temperature. To understand this, two
nodes were considered—node Bx+ on the surface of the shaft
(on the +x-axis) and node B2 which is approximately 20 mm
from the axis of the shaft. At these nodes, displacement was
calculated during and post-quenching (also refer Fig. 3a).
Figure 9(a) shows the displacement of the node Bx+ with time
when quenching begins. As soon as the quenching begins, the
displacement of this node is higher when the quench oil bath
temperature is high. This is so because of the temperature
difference of the quench oil bath. As soon as the quenching
begins, the surface temperature falls so does its surface
contracts (Bx+ will move closer to the axis of the shaft). This
contraction is relatively less when the quench oil bath
temperature is high. At the final stage, when the component
is at ambient temperature, the displacement of node Bx+ is
greater for higher quench oil bath temperature. This is
equivalent to the fact that diameter expands more when the
quench oil bath temperature is higher. Figure 9(b) shows the

4898—Volume 26(10) October 2017 Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance

Fig. 10 Effect of hardenability on length distortion. Phase fraction distribution along the length of the shaft (node B to node A) in low (ÔLÕ) and
high (ÔHÕ) hardenability material. The inset figure shows the distribution near the surface
displacement of node B2 with time when quenching begins.
Similar phenomena happen when it is compared with the plot at
node Bx+ (Fig. 9a). However, when the component reaches
room temperature, there is no difference in the displacement
irrespective of the quench oil bath temperature. This is
consistent with Fig. 8 of the displacement curves.
Because of the different quench oil bath temperature, nodes
B2 and Bx+ behave differently. Displacement of the node B2 is
same irrespective of the quench oil bath temperature, whereas
displacement of node Bx+ is greater when the quench oil bath
temperature is high. This is equivalent to saying that displace-
ment of surface and subsurface (30 to 55 mm) is greater when
the quenchant temperature is high. However, displacement of
the region near the core (till 30 mm) is same irrespective of
the quenchant temperature. Because of the higher quenchant
temperature, the surface and subsurface did not get back to the
state where it should go. However, quenchant temperature does
not have any effect near the core region. Some thermal strains
have developed in the surface and subsurface regions, and these
regions did not get back to the state where it should be. Hence,
development of higher thermal strain is responsible for higher
diameter expansion when quenching is performed at higher
quench oil bath temperature.
3.3 Length Distortion
Length distortion of a shaft was calculated according to
Fig. 1(a). The length of a shaft shrinks during carburizing and
quenching operation. This happens because of mass conserva-
tion, as diameter expands during the process. To understand the
mechanism of length distortion, the formation of the final phase
fraction along the length of the shaft was considered. Two
nodes—node B (near the central axis of the shaft and at
maximum diameter) and node A (near the central axis and at
one edge)—were considered for investigation (Fig. 3).
Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
3.3.1 Effect of Hardenability. The shrinkage in length is
lower in ÔHÕ hardenability material (Table 2). Figure 10 shows
the distribution of phase fraction—when the samples were
cooled down to room temperature after quenching cycle—a-
long the length of the shaft. Note the amount of bainite and
martensite phase fraction in ÔLÕ and ÔHÕ hardenability material.
The higher phase fractions expand the length a bit. In addition,
lower amount of bending in higher hardenability material also
helps in lesser shrinkage in length.
3.3.2 Effect of Quench Oil Bath Temperature. The
length of a shaft shrinks less when the quenching is performed
in higher quench oil bath temperature (Table 2). To understand
the mechanism, the formation of the final phase fraction and
development of thermal strains along the length of the shaft
were again considered.
Thermal strains developed during carburizing and quench-
ing operation are responsible for lesser length shrinkage when
quenching was performed at higher quenchant temperature.
Higher amount of bending with higher quenchant temperature
does not compensate totally the shrinkage in length.
Bending distortion in a shaft and bore distortion in a gear are
significant manufacturing issues, and to maintain its correct
dimension after heat treatment is of utmost importance for an
automobile and off-highway industry. A shaft undergoes
straightening operation after carburizing, which is an additional
step in the manufacturing process chain. Often during straight-
ening, the shaft cracks and this is again an additional issue to a
heat treat engineer. A gear undergoes hard broaching to rectify
bore expansion or contraction and/or ovality. Transmission
shaft and gear are often made of same grade steel. One of the
ways to mitigate distortion in a gear is to manufacture gear
from the ingot which has relatively lower hardenability in the
specification range, and manufacture shaft from the ingot which
has relatively higher hardenability.
Volume 26(10) October 2017—4899
 This process modeling can be coupled with design perfor-
mance iteration cycle to manufacture product at a much lesser
product development cycle time. This computational integrated
framework can be leveraged to obtain optimal, robust, durable
and cost-effective product and processes. This value creation at
the intersections of materials, design and manufacturing should
be future aim for engineers.
4. Conclusion
Distortion is a ubiquitous phenomenon during carburizing
and quenching processes. In this investigation, an integrated
finite element-based model was used to simulate carburizing
and quenching process of a typical transmission shaft. Three
important parameters—hardenability of material, equalization
time during carburizing cycle and quench oil bath temperature
during quenching stage—were considered to predict, analyze
and control distortion. Three distinct types of distortion in shaft
were considered—bending, length and diameter distortion. The
effect of phase transformation and generation of thermal strain
during heating and cooling stage during heat treatment was
investigated, and the mechanism which leads to bending,
diameter and length distortion was analyzed. The conclusions
from this work are summarized:
• Hardenability of a material is an important parameter to
control bending distortion of a shaft. Higher hardenability,
within specification, is preferred to obtain lesser bending
distortion in the shaft.
• Lower hardenability and lower quench oil bath temperature
are preferred to obtain lesser diameter expansion and therefore
are recommended for controlling gear diameter distortions.
• Higher hardenability and higher quench oil bath tempera-
ture are preferred to have lesser shrinkage in length,
important for shaft.
• on Distortion during Heat Treatment, Gear Technol., 2014, p 50–53
Bainitic transformation at higher temperature and its inher-
ent large shear component of deformation are responsible
factors for bending distortion in a shaft. Higher amount of
bainite formation near the surface in lower hardenability
material leads to greater bending distortion.
• Volume expansion due to bainitic and martensitic transfor-
mation leads to diameter expansion and lesser length
shrinkage in higher hardenability material.
• Thermal strains developed when using higher quench oil
bath temperature lead to greater diameter expansion and
lesser length shrinkage.
• 6th International Quenching and Control of Distortion Conference,
Equalization time does not have significant role in bend-
ing, length and diameter distortion in a shaft.
• It is recommended to have lower hardenability steel for
controlling bore distortion in a gear, whereas high harden-
ability steel is recommended for controlling the bending
distortion in a shaft.
References
1. T. Kohlhoff, C. Prinz, R. Rentsch, and H. Surm, Influence of
Manufacturing Parameters on Gear Distortion, Materialwiss. Werk-
stofftech., 2012, 43(1–2), p 84–90
2. Z. Qiana, S. Chumbley, and E. Johnson, The Effect of Specimen
Dimension on Residual Stress Relaxation of Carburized and Quenched
Steels, Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 2011, 529, p 246–252
4900—Volume 26(10) October 2017
3. C. Acht, B. Clausen, F. Hoffmann, and H.-W. Zoch, Simulation of the
Distortion of 20MnCr5 Parts After Asymmetrical Carburization,
Materialwiss. Werkstofftech., 2006, 37(1), p 152–156
4. D.S. MacKenzie and B.L. Ferguson, Effect of Alloy Content on the
Distortion of Oil Quenched Automotive Pinion Gears, International
Heat Treatment and Surface Engineering, 2011, 5(3), p 106–109
5. V.A. Murzin, S.B. Kurilova, L.I. Koshkareva, and N.G. Polumordvi-
nova, Effect of Methods Used to Arrange Components for Carburizing
and Quench Cooling on the Deformation of Gears, Met. Sci. Heat
Treat., 1985, 27(12), p 886–891
6. K. Palaniradja, N. Alagumurthi, and V. Soundararajan, Thermal and
Metallurgical Effects Associated with Gas Carburized and Induction
Hardened Components, Open Mater. Sci. J., 2010, 4(2), p 74–91
7. C. Prinz, B. Clausen, F. Hoffmann, R. Kohlmann, and H.-W. Zoch,
Metallurgical Influence on Distortion of the Case-Hardening Steel
20MnCr5, Materialwiss. Werkstofftech., 2006, 37(1), p 29–33
8. S.S. Sahay, V. Deshmukh, and M. El-Zein, A Probabilistic Approach to
Examine the Effect of Chemistry Variations on Distortion During Industrial
Gas Carburizing, J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 2013, 22(7), p 1855–1860
9. D.H. Herring and G.D. Lindell, Reducing Distortion in Heat-Treated
Gears, Gear Solut., 2004, p 26–35
10. R. Husson, C. Baudouin, R. Bigot, and E. Sura, Experimental
Identification of the Process Influences on Gear Distortion During
Heat Treatment, in 21 ème Congrès français de mécanique, 2013
11. R. Husson, C. Baudouin, R. Bigot, and E. Sura, Consideration of
Residual Stress and Geometry During Heat Treatment to Decrease Shaft
Bending, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 2014, 72(9–12), p 1455–1463
12. B. Clausen, H. Surm, F. Hoffmann, and H.-W. Zoch, The Influence of
Carburizing on Size and Shape Changes, Materialwiss. Werkstofftech.,
2009, 40(5–6), p 414–419
13. V. Heuer, K. Löser, D. R. Faron, and D. Bolton, Low Distortion Heat
Treatment of Transmission Components, in American Gear Manufac-
turers Association, 2010
14. S. Saboury, Effect of Carburizing Process Parameters on Distortion of
AISI 4118 Gears, in First International Conference on Quenching and
Control of Distortion, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 1992
15. A.M. Freborg, B.L. Ferguson, Z. Li, and D.X. Schwam, Bending
Fatigue Strength Improvement of Carburized Aerospace Gears, in 23rd
ASM Heat Treating Conference, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 2005
16. K. Arimoto, H. Kim, M. Narazaki, D. Lambert, and W. T. Wu,
Mechanism of Quench Distortion on Steel Shaft with Keyway, in 21st
ASM Heat Treating Society Conference, Indianapolis, IN, 2001
17. A.C. Reardon, Press Quenching and Effects of Prior Thermal History
18. J.M. Tartaglia and G.T. Eldis, Core Hardenability Calculations for
Carburizing Steels, Metall. Trans. A, 1984, 15(6), p 1173–1183
19. B.L. Ferguson, A.M. Freborg, G. Petrus, and M.L. Callabresi,
Predicting the Heat-Treat Response of a Carburized Helical Gear,
Gear Technology, 2002, 19(6), p 20–25
20. B.E. Brooks and C. Beckermann, Prediction of Heat Treatment
Distortion of Cast Steel C-Rings, in Proceedings of the 61st SFSA
Technical and Operating Conference, Steel FoundersÕ Society of
America, Chicago, IL, 2007
21. A. Freborg, B. Ferguson, and Z. Li, Predicting Distortion and Residual
Stress in a Vacuum Carburized and Gas Quenched Steel Coupon, in
Proceedings of Quenching Control and Distortion-Proceedings of the
Including the 4th International Distortion Engineering Conference,
Chicago, Illinois, USA, 2012
22. E.M. Bortoleto, G.S. Sarmiento, and A. Fioranelli, Using Abaqus User
Subroutines to Develop a New Finite Element Modeling Tool for Heat
Treatment Simulation, in 2009 SIMULIA Customer Conference, 2009
23. J. Goldak, J. Zhoua, S. Tchernova, and D. Downeya, Validation of
VrHeatTreat Software for Heat Treatment and Carburization, Goldak
Technologies Inc., Ottawa, 2007
24. D.-Y. Ju, C. Liu, and T. Inoue, Numerical Modeling and Simulation of
Carburized and Nitrided Quenching Process, J. Mater. Process.
Technol., 2003, 143, p 880–885
25. S.-J. Lee and Y.-K. Lee, Finite Element Simulation of Quench
Distortion in a Low-Alloy Steel Incorporating Transformation Kinetics,
Acta Mater., 2008, 56(7), p 1482–1490
26. M. Jung, M. Kang, and Y.-K. Lee, Finite-Element Simulation of
Quenching Incorporating Improved Transformation Kinetics in a Plain
Medium-Carbon Steel, Acta Mater., 2012, 60(2), p 525–536
Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
27. S.-J. Lee, D.K. Matlock, and C.J.V. Tyne, Comparison of Two Finite
Element Simulation Codes Used to Model the Carburizing of Steel,
Comput. Mater. Sci., 2013, 68, p 47–54
28. K. Arimoto, T. Horino, F. Ikuta, C. Jin, and S. Tamura, Explanation of
the Origin of Distortion and Stress Distribution Patterns in Water-
Quenched Chromium Steel Cylinders Using Computer Simulation, in
Proceedings of the 23rd ASM Heat Treating Society Conference, David
L. Lawrence Convention Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, 2005
29. K. Arimoto, T. Horino, F. Ikuta, C. Jin, S. Tamura, and M. Narazaki,
Explanation of the Origin of Distortion and Residual Stress in Water
Quenched Cylinders Using Computer Simulation, J. ASTM Int., 2006,
3(5), p 1–22
30. K. Arimoto, S. Yamanaka, M. Narazaki, and K. Funatani, Explanation
of the Origin of Quench Distortion and Residual Stress in Specimens
Using Computer Simulation, Int. J. Microstruct. Mater. Prop., 2009,
4(2), p 168–186
31. D.F. Watt, L. Coon, M. Bibby, J. Goldak, and C. Henwood, An
Algorithm for Modeling Microstructural Development in Weld Heat-
Affected Zone (Part A) Reaction Kinetics, Acta Metall., 1988, 36(11),
p 3029–3035
Journal of Materials Engineering and Performance
32. J.S. Kirkaldy and D. Venugopalan, Phase Transformation in Ferrous
Alloys, in American Institute of Mining Engineers, Philadelphia, PA, 1984
33. J.S. Kirkaldy and R.C. Sharma, A New Phenomenology for Steel it and
CCT Curves, Scr. Metall., 1982, 16(10), p 1193–1198
34. J.S. Kirkaldy, Prediction of Alloy Hardenability from Thermodynamic
and Kinetic Data, Metall. Trans., 1973, 4(10), p 2327–2333
35. M.F. Ashby and K.E. Esterling, The Transformation Hardening of
Steel Surfaces by Laser Beams-I. Hypo-Eutectoid Steels, Acta Metall.,
1984, 32(11), p 1935–1948
36. V. Deshmukh, S.S. Sahay, G. Deshmukh, E.M. Johnson, and M. El-
Zein, Simulation and Optimization of Distortion in the Carburized
Components, in Proceedings of ASM M&MT Conference, 2011
37. ASTM A255-10, Standard Test Methods for Determining Hardenabil-
ity of Steel, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, 2010
38. K. Zhu, H. Chen, J.-P. Masse, O. Bouaziz, and G. Gachet, The Effect
of Prior Ferrite Formation on Bainite and Martensite Transformation
Kinetics in Advanced High-Strength Steels, Acta Mater., 2013, 61, p
6025–6036
39. P.J. Withers and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, Residual Stress. Part 2–Nature
and Origins, Mater. Sci. Technol., 2001, 17(4), p 366–375
Volume 26(10) October 2017—4901