Application of Hardenability Concepts

in Heat Treatment of Steel

D O U G L A S V. D O A N E
N e w information on hardenability is available to the heat treater, in the form o f a
critical review o f existing hardenability data, more accurate predictions o f harden-
ability f r o m chemical composition, and new data on austenite phase transformation
kinetics. This paper summarizes this new information and provides examples as well
as references to more comprehensive coverage o f several subjects. These subjects
include 1) correlation o f end-quench hardenability bar cooling rates with cooling
rates in fully immersed rounds, 2) documentation o f the strong influence o f carbon
on the effectiveness o f alloying elements on hardenability, 3) alloy interaction
effects, and 4) various aspects o f austenite conditioning. Examples o f the use o f
hardenability in metallurgical design emphasize the use o f actual heat treating
practice to establish hardenability requirements, the need to consider both core and
case properties when heat treating carburized steels, and the role o f hardenability in
induction and flame-hardening.
Extensive work is in progress in Europe and North America to devise and perfect
systems f o r predicting hardenability, microstructure and mechanical properties
f r o m chemical composition, section size and heat treatment parameters. These
systems hold great promise, but important considerations are the limitations o f such
systems because of variability in composition due to inherent segregation in steel
ingots and in the products o f those ingots, variability in heat treating conditions,
and, o f course, the limitations imposed by the empirical nature o f the predictive
systems. Nevertheless, such systems provide steel producers, heat treaters and
machine designers with useful new tools.

T H E R E has been considerable activity t h r o u g h o u t the benefit can be t a k e n o f the results. It is also i m p o r t a n t
world, evident in publications during the last five years, to understand the limitations o f these correlations, so
to take a d v a n t a g e o f the wealth of available information they can be applied realistically.
relating the c o m p o s i t i o n o f steel to microstructure and A review o f published data on hardenability and
properties. T h e advent o f computers has m a d e the task much o f the w o r k on application o f hardenability
considerably easier. Metallurgists and heat treaters concepts is contained in two recent b o o k s ~,2. It is the
should be a w a r e o f the data available and the methods purpose o f this p a p e r to direct the readers attention to
used to analyze a n d correlate the data, so that m a x i m u m i n f o r m a t i o n that should be o f particular interest to heat
treaters a n d those concerned with the p r o f o u n d effect o f
heat t r e a t m e n t on the properties o f steel. It will not be
DOUGLAS V. DOANE, Climax Molybdenum Co. of possible, o f course, to treat any subject in detail, so this
Michigan, a Subsidiary of AMAX Inc., Ann Arbor, MI paper is, in a sense, an overview.
ISSN 0190-9177/79/0806-0005500.75/0
J. H E A T T R E A T I N G 9 1979 AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR METALS VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1--5
 Table I. A Summary of the Observed Correlation of the End-Quench Bar with Center Positions of
Rounds Quenched in Oil and Water (Carney + SAE Handbook)

R o u n d size,
equal half- H - b a n d values, R o u n d size, equal microstructures, in.
temperature SAE H a n d b o o k ,
End- quench Ideal time, in. in. 95 pet martensite 80 pct m a r t e n s i t e 50 pct martensite
distance, diam,
1/16 in. in. Water Oil Water Oil Wa t e r Oil Water Oil Water Oil

1 0.60
2 1.00 0.70 0.40 0.7 0.2 0.40 0.25 0.40 0.25 0.55 0.25
4 1.75 1.25 0.80 1.2 0.6 0.75 0.45 0.75 0.50 1.0 0.50
8 2.75 2.05 1.50 2.0 1.4 1.45 0.80 1.60 0.95 1.65 1.0
12 3.65 2.80 2.15 3.2 2.0 1.95 1.15 2.05 1.35 2.10 1.45
16 4.50 3.50 2.80 3.9 2.8 2.30 1.50 2.40 1.75 2.60 1.85
24 5.75 4.60 3.45 . . . . . . 2.75 2.05 2.90 2.40 3.10 2.45
32 6.70 5.40 4.30 . . . . . . . . . 2.55 999 2.90 99. 2.95

R o u n d size,
equal half- H - b a n d values, R o u n d size, equal mi c ros t ruc t ure s , mm
temperature SAE H a n d b o o k ,
End-quench Ideal time, m m mm 95 pet martensite 80 pct m a r t e n s i t e 50 pct m ar ten s ite
distance, diam,
mm mm Water Oil Water Oil Wa t e r Oil Water Oil Wa t e r Oil

1.6 15 . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2 25 18 10 18 5.1 10 6.4 10 6.4 14 6.4
6.4 45 32 20 31 15 19 11 19 13 25 13
13 70 52 38 51 36 37 20 41 24 42 25
19 93 71 55 81 51 50 29 52 34 53 37
25 ll4 89 71 99 71 58 38 61 45 66 47
38 146 117 88 . . . . . . 70 52 74 61 79 62
51 170 137 109 . . . . . . ... 65 ... 74 ... 75

CORRELATION OF HARDENABILITY TEST equivalent microstructures is not the same, reflecting

RESULTS WITH ACTUAL QUENCHED PARTS
The end-quench hardenability bar does not provide
the same heat transfer characteristics and internal
stresses as an immersion quenched part. Yet correla-
tions are imperative to be able to specify steels accord-
ing to their hardenability characteristics. Many investi-
gators have attempted to establish this correlation, and
to explain the variations that are evident, but the work
of Carney 3 was extensive. A summary of his correlations
between equal microstructure, as well as equal half-
temperature time,* in the end-quench bar and the corre-
* H a l f - t e m p e r a t u r e time is the time to reach a t e m p e r a t u r e halfway
between the quench an d r o o m t e m p e r a t u r e .
sponding positions in rounds quenched in water and oil
is given in Table I. An additional column has been in-
cluded in the table showing Jominy distance v s diameter
taken from the H-band charts published in the 1975
SAE Handbook. Carney's data for equal half-tempera-
ture time are fairly comparable to the H-band values,
indicating that the severity of quench was the same for
both evaluations. However, the sizes of rounds based on
other influences such as heat transfer and internal
stresses. The SAE Iron and Steel Technical Committee,
Division 8 on Hardenability, recently reviewed the cor-
relations between end-quench distances and diameters
of quenched rounds of equivalent microstructure, and
has issued a more realistic correlation, as shown in Figs.
1 and 2. These correlations reflect the differences ob-
served in practice, even under carefully controlled
quenching conditions, and show that correlations are
less accurate with larger bar sizes.
THE HARDENABILITY EFFECT OF ALLOYS
INCLUDING CARBON-ALLOY AND
ALLOY-ALLOY INTERACTIONS
The ASM book 1 extensively reviews the metallurgical
factors influencing hardenability of steels. After dis-
cussing the effects of grain size, austenitizing tempera-
ture and time, the many important studies of the effects
of austenite composition are reviewed. For the presenta-
tion of alloy effects, steels are grouped as follows:
Carbon-manganese steels

6 - - V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1 J. H E A T T R E A T I N G

M e d i u m - c a r b o n low-alloy steels
Carburizing steels
High-hardenability steels
These classifications reflect the fact that alloys affect
hardenability to differing degrees depending on the car-
bon content o f the steel a n d the other alloys present. In
the following discussion it will be assumed that austeni-
tizing temperatures are high enough so that all alloy ad-
ditions are in solution, to maximize their hardenability
effect, but not high enough to coarsen the austenitic
grain size to the point that it detracts f r o m toughness of
the hardened steel.
G r a n g e 4 recently devised a new hardenabilty test
(called the " h o t - b r i n e " test) for shallow hardening
steels and presented new d a t a on the effects of carbon
and alloys on hardenability, in terms of " h a r d e n a b l e
d i a m e t e r " * expressed by the equation:
*Hardenable diameter is that diameter of water quenched round
that will exhibit 90 pct martensite at the center.
D n = D c + ADMn + A D p + ADsi + ADc~ +
zXDNi + ADcr + ADMo + AD v
J. HEAT TREATING
Fig. 1--Correlation between location in a
water-quenched round bar and position (dis-
tance from the quenched end) on the Jominy
bar (SAE).
D a t a for use with this equation are s h o w n in Figs. 3 and
4. T h e G r a n g e test can be applied to steels which are
n o r m a l l y water quenched in sizes up to those equivalent
to 23 m m rounds. These include section sizes for which
J o m i n y end-quench data are not applicable.
T h e ideal critical diam, Dr, c o n c e p t has been so uni-
versally accepted as a m e a s u r e o f hardenability that
a l m o s t all studies o f alloy effects are expressed in terms
o f Dr. T h e definition, for reference, is the diameter o f a
given steel bar which will exhibit 50 pct martensite at the
center when subjected to a hypothetical quench which
reduces the surface t e m p e r a t u r e o f the steel to the b a t h
t e m p e r a t u r e in zero time. It is i m p o r t a n t to r e m e m b e r
that the definition is a m i c r o s t r u c t u r a l one, a n d m a k e s
no reference to hardness. T h e w o r k o f G r o s s m a n n 5
established the fact that the effects o f alloying elements
on hardenability in m e d i u m c a r b o n steels are multiplica-
tive a n d the effects can be expressed as " m u l t i p l y i n g
f a c t o r s " related to a base/)1. Subsequent work by m a n y
investigators c o n f i r m e d the soundness o f this concept,
but p r o v i d e d evidence that the application o f the prin-
ciple was complex. S o m e o f the following p r o b l e m s
VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1--7
Fig. 2 - - C o r r e l a t i o n between location in an oil-
quenched r o u n d bar a n d position (distance
from the q u e n c h e d end) on the J o m i n y bar
(SAE).

d
0.(:

0.5
16

14
06
0.5

0.4

d0.3
i!
ua 0 . 4
I--
ILl
~E
r'~
~o.3
/ t t
lO

8 "
ne"

N
W

W
-J
0.2

0.1

//
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0
6 z ELEMENT, wt %
r,.
Fig. 4 - - C h a n g e in h a r d e n a b l e diameter (AD) with C, M n , Si, C u , Ni,
Cr, and M o (Grange).

0.1
were encountered:

1) A multiplying factor for a given element was not

0 always directly proportional to the percentage of that
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
element.
CARBON, 7.
Fig. 3 - - H a r d e n a b i l i t y o f Fe-C alloys (90 pct martensite, water 2) Interaction effects occurred at times; that is, the
q u e n c h e d , no. 4 A S T M Grain Size) (Grange). multiplying factor for a given percentage of an element

8 - - V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1 J. H E A T T R E A T I N G
 0.~
ASTM

0.8

0.7
t J 4 Grain
Size

5.0 -
OFrom Data of Kramer,
Siegel and Brooks
9 From Data of Crafts
and Lamont /
J
From deRetana and
Doane (for Low C
t~_ 0 . 6 Steels
>- -----From Jatczak (for
0.5 High C Steels)
4.0
0.4

,,<
.!
0.3

0.2
3.0 iII Df J
0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 /
CARBON, Y~
Fig. 5--Multiplying factor for carbon plus grain size (empirical exten- r r
sion of Kramer factors by deRetana and Doane).

/
!
2.0
1.00
t I I i i I / I
0.90 ~STM Grain Size ~
~ ~ 5 c , I~ t ~ 1700 F

0.80
1.0 ~ ~ #
u. 0.70 , . 0 1.0 2.0 3.0
MANGANESE, g
~- ////~" 152s F (83o c ~ > ~ . ~ ' Fig. 7--Multiplying factors for manganese.
0.60 //,/I"/ i 147,5 F (800 C)" ~ TM

I--
-~ 0.50
/////," i
and c o m p a r i s o n with later studies by others than the
0.40 alloy studies by G r o s s m a n n . In fact G r o s s m a n n , in his
classic text, 7 states that the data o f K r a m e r are p r o b a b l y
m o r e generally useful. As a way o f s u m m a r i z i n g the
0.20 0.40
0.60 0.80 1.00
alloy effects, and the influence o f c a r b o n content on
CARBON, %-
Fig. 6--Multiplying factors for carbon at each austenitizing condi- these effects, the following diagrams are presented. In
tion. Data plotted on background of original Kramer data for these diagrams, the K r a m e r multiplying factors for use
medium-carbon steels with grain size variation from 4 to 8 ASTM
(Jatczak). in m e d i u m c a r b o n steels are c o m p a r e d with those o f
deRetana and D o a n e s for low c a r b o n steels and with
those o f J a t c z a k 9 for high c a r b o n steels. (It should be
pointed out that J a t c z a k used 90 pct martensite as his
m a y not be the same when added in conjunction with
hardenability criterion rather than 50 pct martensite, for
another element as when used alone in the steel.
the good reasons which he points out in his paper.) First,
3) The accuracy o f using hardness measurements to
the strong effect o f c a r b o n on hardenability is shown in
determine the 50 pct martensite position in the hardened
Figs. 5 and 6. The effect o f austenitizing t e m p e r a t u r e is
pattern o f the test piece is open to question. This is com-
i m p o r t a n t in considering steels o f high c a r b o n content.
plicated by the fact that the steel may exhibit either
For the sake o f simplicity in further c o m p a r i s o n s , the
pearlite or bainite as the nonmartensitic structure. The
data o f J a t c z a k for high c a r b o n steels will be limited to
use o f microstructure in place o f the hardness test ap-
those for steels quenched f r o m 925 ~ (1700 ~
pears to have s o m e merit in determining the 50 pct mar-
As shown in Fig. 7, the effect of m a n g a n e s e up to 1
tensite position.
pct is stronger in low and high c a r b o n steels than in
With these p r e c a u t i o n a r y statements, let us proceed to m e d i u m c a r b o n steels.
review some o f the alloy effects. The effect o f silicon on hardenability is m u c h less
The studies o f alloy effects by Kramer, Siegel and than that o f m a n g a n e s e and varies widely with c a r b o n
Brooks 6 a p p e a r to be m o r e adaptable to modification content and with other alloys present, as s h o w n in Fig.

J. HEAT TREATING VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1--9

 2.8 5.0
Jatczak (multi-alloy
2.6 -high C steels)
/
2.4 I /
~ 2.2 d a t c z a k (single-alloy r
high C steels) 4.0
Kramer, Siegel /
2.0 FL / / apd Brooks
~ 1.8
// ou Z
/
~ 1.6 / deRetana and Kramer, Siegel /i
/ Doane {low C w & Brooks ( a v g 4 /
1.4 // i f ~/ steels) 3.0 I
J
j r
1.2 // fl

1.o ~ /
0 2.0 =
J /I 'll
0.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8 Jatczak
/ / ~ ' l h i g h C ste s)
SILICON, % 2.0 /."/ I I I I
Fig. 8--Multiplying factors for effect of silicon on hardenability.
i / .p", I I
I I II I I
I I

~i
"

" 9 i ' d e R e t a n a and Doan

(low C s t e e l s )
8. Silicon is relatively ineffective in low carbon steels,
but quite effective in high carbon steels.
z.o " I I I I I I
0
The effect o f nickel o n hardenability is also af- 0.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8
fected by carbon content, and, as s h o w n in Fig. 9, is CHROMIUM~ %
greatest in m e d i u m carbon steels. Jatczak 9 reports an in- Fig. 10--Multiplying factors for effect of chromium on hardenability.
The Jatczak data for carburizing steels are given.
teraction between m a n g a n e s e and nickel which needs to
be taken into account w h e n steels are austenitized at
lower temperatures than 925 ~ (1700 ~ with nickel, if nickel was present in a m o u n t s greater
In general the effect o f c h r o m i u m on hardenability is than 0.75 pct.
greatest in medium carbon steels, as s h o w n in Fig. 10. In Boron is being used to an increasing extent, at least in
low carbon steels, and in carburized steels, the effect is the US, to enhance the hardenability of both carbon-
less, but quite marked. Jatczak 9 points out, as did manganese steels and o f low alloy steels. The work o f
Grossmann, 7 that at lower austenitizing temperatures, Lewellyn and C o o k , 1~one curve f r o m which is shown in
c h r o m i u m is less effective because o f the stability of car- Fig. 12, demonstrates the m a r k e d influence of carbon
bides. on the b o r o n hardenability effect in a plain 0.8 pct Mn
The work o f Jatczak 9 s h o w e d a much greater effect o f steel. The effect is s o m e w h a t different in alloyed steels,
m o l y b d e n u m in high carbon steels than in the medium resulting in a smaller b o r o n multiplying factor which
carbon steels studied by Kramer, 6 as s h o w n in Fig. 11. reaches 1.0 at the lower c a r b o n content associated with
The work o f deRetana and D o a n e s indicates a lesser but eutectoid composition in the alloyed steel. Kapadia, as
still marked effect on hardenability in low carbon steels.
Their work also revealed a definite synergistic effect
1700 F
- (925 C)
4.0
5.o / I
Jatczak 9
. . . . . / deRetana & Doan
(hign ~ s ~ e e l s ) / l ( l o w c steels
4.0 ;--/with >.75% Ni)
3.0
I---

(-D I
datczak and Doane
(high C Steels)"-deRet
(low steels)
F--
N 2.o ~Kramer, Siegel ] ,,,J,/'~'~ deRetana & Doane
and Brooks " t ~ @ ~ / 2.0 " ~ (low C steels

1.0
1.0
2.0
-T 3.0
1.0 ~
0 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00
! !
1.25
!

1.50
NICKEL, % MOLYBDENUM, %
Fig. 9--Multiplying factors for effect of nickel on hardenability. Fig. l 1--Multiplying factors ~ r molybdenum.

10--VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1 J. HEAT TREATING

 4.0 | I I ( l I I I I by J a t c z a k . 9 In earlier w o r k , Moser and Legat" observed
r3 90% M a r t e n s i t e interactions between c h r o m i u m and m o l y b d e n u m , as
o 9 80% M a r t e n s i t e shown in Fig. 13. Also, Glen ~2 observed an interaction
3.5 between nickel and m a n g a n e s e in m e d i u m c a r b o n steels
O 50% M a r t e n s i t e
with and without b o r o n as s h o w n in Fig. 14.
~XxO
3.0 All o f the a b o v e discussion o f the hardenability mul-
tiplying factors of various elements, and the i m p o r t a n t
influence o f carbon, and alloy e n v i r o n m e n t on the mul-
2.5 tiplying factors should not be considered confusing, or
BORON
MULTIPLYING adding to the " b l a c k a r t " o f hardenability and heat
FACTOR treatment. Rather, this new i n f o r m a t i o n can be used to
2.0
a d v a n t a g e if one recognizes the necessity of classifying
steels and developing alloy effects for each class o f steel.
1.5 Fortunately, with c o m p u t e r s available, this a p p r o a c h is
not b u r d e n s o m e , as will be discussed later.

1.0
AUSTENITE CONDITIONING

T h e A S M b o o k ~ reviews the influence o f austenite

0.5
conditioning on hardenability and t r a n s f o r m a t i o n in
steel. Included in the review is i n f o r m a t i o n on melt con-
0 I I I I I I I I I ditioning, t r a n s f o r m a t i o n f r o m w o r k e d austenite (as in
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 the controlled rolled H S L A steels) and the influence o f
CARBON, % rapid heating. The high p r o d u c t i o n techniques of f l a m e
Fig. 12--Effect o f carbon o n b o r o n multiplying factor in 0.8 pct Mn
steels (Lewellyn a n d Cook). hardening and induction heating are being widely used,
and the p a r a m e t e r s for effective austenitizing in these
processes are usually w o r k e d out on an individual p a r t
well as Maitrepierre et al, have summarized the effects
basis. The heat treater is a w a r e in a qualitative way o f
of b o r o n in considerable detail in the recent T M S /
the influence o f time and t e m p e r a t u r e on austenite
A I M E b o o k , 2 and p r o v i d e some structural explanations
h o m o g e n e i t y and o f the effectiveness o f self-quenching
for the influence o f c a r b o n and alloy content on the
f r o m the unheated p o r t i o n o f the part. The w o r k o f
b o r o n hardenability effect.
O r l i c h ) 3 s u m m a r i z e d in Fig. 15, d e m o n s t r a t e s the im-
The interaction o f alloys in enhancing and suppress-
p o r t a n c e o f heating rate and holding time on austenite
ing hardenability has been shown by several investiga-
conditioning in a 1 pet C-1.5 pet Cr steel. Specimens
tors. As cited above, the M o - N i interaction in low car-
were p r o g r a m heated at varying rates then immediately
bon steels was observed by deRetana and D o a n e a and
quenched to provide the data in the left portion o f the
the Ni-Mn interaction in high carbon steels was observed
figure. A n o t h e r series o f specimens was heated at
130 ~ to several different isothermal t e m p e r a t u r e s
E 120 I a n d held for various times to provide the data in the
E 100 /Z. -4 = right portion o f the diagram. T h e schematic curves A
and C in Fig. 16 display the extremes in shape o f the
I-- s "S p~
,,, 80 hardness-depth curve which might be encountered in in-
duction hardening to a given depth. Curve B is m o r e
60 " 1 t J .." -" ' E
likely the desired pattern, in which heating rate, holding
u 21 time and hardenability o f the steel are properly con-
7-
40 ,,,6 ~. t ~ Au~tenitizing Temperature trolled to give substantial surface hardening and a grad-
j , ~ 5 0 C (90 F) above Ac 3 ual transition to the u n h a r d e n e d core.
20 9- - - - 3 0 0 C ( 5 4 0 F) aboveAc 3 ' bJ
O ~, Simple Cr Steels
9 9 Cr-~VIo ,Steels ,
0 TAILORING THE STEEL TO THE APPLICATION
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
CHROMIUM, %
AND HEAT TREATMENT
Fig. 1 3 - - T h e effect o f c h r o m i u m a n d austenitizing condition on the
ideal critical diameter in simple c h r o m i u m steels and in Cr-Mo steels The C H A T system developed by Breen and coworkers
(Moser and Legat). at International H a r v e s t e r represents an advanced use

J. H E A T T R E A T I N G V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1--11
 IDEAL DIAMETER, mm
25 50 75 100 125 150 175
2.0

_._.
1.5
i/& " ~ ~

W I l f /,,,'/,/ i ..~ i I
i Fig. 14--Relationship between ideal d/am and
l.IJ
Z 1.0 i1~.." ~'. J ~..--. 4 - ' - - - manganese content with various nickel con-
tents (Glen).
I/16',//I i / - 'I ~ "7 2.o~' I
1_9
Z l//fAY , 9 /~ No Additions
l lllY / _1 I I ,, 1.0~ Ni
+ o
0.5
------/; ' p / ; T S T r ------ Add!,,O~ O " .o~,~ . ,
/1/~,~" 9 1.01~, Ni
9 i
///,F~/'- I 2.0% INi I
I 2 3 4 5 6 7
IDEAL DIAMETER, in,

HEATING RATE, C/sec

2400 300 30 3 0.22 0.05
1300 /////////
~AcL~///~
?'///r~Austenite + Liquid~,//'/'~j "////////~ Austenite + tiquid~/ 2300
Acc
1200
J ~ i
:'t!l Nk''HOm~
If ,'
Austenit~"
- - I
~ ."Homogeneous Austenite"
2200

2100
I ~ 1, I I - "Inhomogeneous " ~
I \ I I i Austenite" \
i i00 2000
& "Inhomogeneous~ r ~ l I - N
1900
r~
I Austenite'I\ I ~J
i000
o.- i i
I " "I.... I ,a _ 1800
t.iJ , , ' ,
~CllL~ Au~tenite + Carbide --.4_I ..7 _ Austenite + Carbide
1700 w
t,l I \I I I I
~- 900
I
I "%Ill
I---' ~lFerrite + " ' I - . ~
800 ~Ib_ ~ A u s t e n i t e + ~
I I

I
--
I
I
I
I
i
-

-
ACle
Ferrite +
Austenite +
1600

- 1500
iAClb ~ Carbide
~J-- I I - - 1400
I I gerrite + Carbicle i ~] Ac2 Ferlrite + Carbide
I I I I I I I I I 1300
70O -

0.i i i0 102 103 104 0.01 0.I 1 i0 I0 ~ 10 3

CONTINUOUS ISOTHERMAL
TIME, see
Fig. 15--The effect o f rapid heating (left) and varying isothermal holding (right) on the achievement o f homogeneous austenite in a 1.0 pct C-1.5
pct Cr steel (Orlich).

1 2 - - V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1 J, H E A T T R E A T I N G
 of hardenability i n f o r m a t i o n in which " a p p l i c a t i o n
tailoring" (AT) is c o m b i n e d with " c o m p u t e r h a r m o n i z -
i n g " ( C H ) to provide the designer and m a n u f a c t u r e r
with least-cost steels or a choice o f alternate standard
~E] A
steels which can meet the p r o p e r t y requirements in a
given part. The system is discussed in s o m e detail in
both Refs. 1 and 2. This p a p e r will indicate briefly how
hardenability requirements for a given part are estab-
lished in the A T p o r t i o n of the system. Rather than use
the established correlations between end-quench bar
positions and diameter of quenched bar using standard-
Heated Depth ized austenitizing and quenching conditions (see Figs. 1
and 2), the " J o m i n y equivalent c o n d i t i o n " (Jec) is
Surface ~,. ~- determined by experimental means but u n d e r produc-
DEPTH BELOW SURFACE tion conditions. Figure 17 graphically illustrates the
Fig. 16--Range o f gradient hardnesses produced by induction harden-
process.
ing.
The Jec is determined experimentally by c o m p a r i n g
hardness values, obtained on the cross section o f a part
Part Cross Section or parts subjected to the p r o d u c t i o n heat and quench cy-
Jominy Hardenability
cle, with hardness values obtained on J o m i n y bars o f
the exact same steel. Four critical items m u s t be consid-
~kTA~_7~7~art Thermal History) ered when determining the experimental curves:
I mended~7er'a'tur e) 1) The J o m i n y bar should be given the same thermal
Depth from Surface Jominy Distance
"\ -~ m I cycle as the part because hardenability can be influenced
-- ~-! I
\ ~=I , I. by thermal history.
\.. ~----4--u 2) For carburizing applications, the part or parts
"\ w ,/
\ ~._| I /
should be c o p p e r plated if processed with a p r o d u c t i o n
\\~___/Cross Section
Jec(c> load, to retain the same c a r b o n as the end-quench bar.
Jominy Distance Also, if extremely long heat cycles are e m p l o y e d , the
Fig. 1 7 - - D e t er m i nin g J o m i n y equivalent condition (Jec). depth o f flat g r o u n d on the end-quenched bar m a y have
to be deeper t h a n usual to assure that there is no effect
o f decarburization.
DISTANCE FROM QUENCHED 3) E n o u g h parts should be examined to evaluate the
END, mm
effects o f load size, position in the load, a n d changes in
5 I0 15 20 25 quench severity o f the coolant with usage.
! I i I

50
\= 4) The steel used for Jec evaluation m u s t have an
end-quench curve which drops steeply t h r o u g h the criti-
cal cooling rate range so that hardness changes give a
o
t~"
-I-
.40
\!\ I
sensitive indication o f cooling rate.

The range o f cooling rates to be encountered in pro-

duction is i m p o r t a n t . This variation coupled with the
!
L~J variation in hardenability o f the steel being used ac-
Z
C~
n~
\I counts for the range in hardnesses experienced. Figure
-r 3O 18 d e m o n s t r a t e s these principles graphically. In this sit-
uation, since this is a carburizing steel, a core hardness
variation o f 29 to 48.5 H R C would be expected if the
Jec varied as indicated. If this was not acceptable, either
20 the quench consistency would have to be i m p r o v e d or
4 8 12 16
the steel H - b a n d would have to be restricted to a nar-
DISTANCE FROM QUENCHED rower width. A lower c a r b o n steel with higher harden-
END, sixteenths in.
Fig. 18--Variations in core hardness resulting from variations in ability could be used but at a cost penalty.
quenching conditions and steel hardenability. The system becomes s o m e w h a t m o r e complicated

J. H E A T T R E A T I N G V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1--13
c~

-r"
--'r- Gradient
I--- / Allowable Contact Stress
(Pitch Line)= StrenQthi~HardnesShLne)

F-
Sl Fig. 1 9 - - S t r e s s v s strength relationship (carbu-
rized gear r o o t a n d pitch line).

I..-- Gradient = Strength

._.1

__J
_..I

DEPTH BELOW SURFACE

when establishing the hardenability requirements for effect of carbon and various alloys, of the importance
carburized parts. Here the base hardenability and hard~ of austenite conditioning, and of the methods available
enability throughout all portions of the case must be to define hardenability requirements, leads to a review
considered so that the strength gradient can be matched of the methods to predict hardenability from composi-
to the stress gradient. The diagram in Fig. 19 shows tion. As part of the Symposium on Hardenability Con-
schematically the stress and strength gradients at the cepts with Applications to Steel 2 this author reviewed
pitch line of a gear and at the root of the gear tooth. several hardenability predictors available in the open lit-
With patience the necessary base and case hardenability erature as a prelude to detailed presentations and discus-
requirements can be established. Details are given in sions of computerized methods of predicting harden-
Refs. l and 2. ability. As part of that review, three methods were used
to predict D~ values and hardenability curves of nominal
PREDICTING HARDENABILITY compositions of several steels for which hardenability
" b a n d s " have been established by the American Iron
The foregoing discussion of methods and data avail- and Steel Institute (AISI) and the Society of Automotive
able to correlate hardenability test results with actual Engineers (SAE). The relationships established by
quenched parts, of the wealth of data on hardenability Hodge and Orehoski 14 for 50 and 99.9 pct martensite at
various carbon contents, Fig. 20, and those established
by Grossmann 7 for D r and distance from the quenched
M,-~rtensite 8
60 [ ~-
end of the hardenability bar, Fig. 21, were used with
modifications of AISI published tables relating D 1 to
hardness at various positions on the end-quench bar.
Examples of the comparison of predicted/91 values
. ..~.,.o~- L / " s "~'- .9" ~ 507~ Martensite
and predicted hardenability curves with actual harden-
ability bands are given in Figs. 22 to 24, which are taken
= 30 - - ~'~T-~ ~'" - ---~ ----- from the Appendix of this author's T M S / A I M E paper}
Note here that O~/I represents calculation by the method
20 developed by the Climax Molybdenum Company, /9~2
represents calculations using the US Steel slide rule
10 which is one of several using Grossmann's hardenability
0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70
CARBON, %
multiplying factors, and D~3 represents conversion of
Fig. 2 0 - - H a r d n e s s o f m a r t e n s i t e p r o d u c t s as a f u n c t i o n o f carbon hardenability curve data calculated using the following
c o n t e n t ( H o d g e a n d Orehoski). equation developed by Just: 15

1 4 - - V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1 J. H E A T T R E A T I N G
 DISTANCE FROM QUENCHED END, mm
I0 20 30 40 50
7~ 1 7 5

i~4[ i!i!~iiiiin
m ~ l O 0
Fig. 21--Relationship between end-quenched
distance and hardenability (D/).

Fl-tC/rtC2

2 4 6 8 lO 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
DISTANCE FROMQUENCHEDEND, sixteenths of an inch

H R C a t J4-40 = 88~,/C- - 0-0135EV~ + 19Cr + E = Jominy distance in sixteenths o f an inch

K = A S T M grain size numbers
6.3Ni + 16Mn + 3 5 M o + 5St - 0-82KAsTM --
The two values for D~ represent calculations of D~ from
20"~ + 2.11E - 2 H R C the lower and upper bands o f the A I S I / S A E hardenabil-
ity band. Hardness data points designated (El) were ob-
where: HRC = hardness in Rockwell C tained with the Climax method, points designated (&)

HARDENABILITY BAND 4820 H

Ni
~[I .2o/
M~ ~---G'C; i
' L /3< I /3 oI / .30

0.20 0.60 0.23 3.50 0 0.25 7

DIAMETERS OF ROUNDS WlIR SAME AS QUENCHED HARDNESC LOCATION IN ROUND ~UENCH
3,8 SURFACE MiLD
I.I 2.0 2.9 3.R 4.B 5.B 6.7 31~ RADIUS FROMCENTER WATER
0.7 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.~ 2.8 3,2 3.6 3.g CENTER QUENCH
1 I l I I I l I I -
0.8 1.8 2.5 3.0 3.~ 3.8 SURFACE MILD
0.5 1.0 1.6 2.0 2.~ 2.8 3 , 2 3.6 ~.0 3/4 RADIUS FROMCENTER OIL
0.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1 . 7 - 2 . 0 " 2.~ 2.8 3.1 CENTER IOUENCH
e'-, I
Fig. 22--Comparison of calculated
hardenability with AISI/SAE H- 6C ;
D cl= 3.2
band for 4820 H. .J : >__ I
U i
m SC !
DI2= 2.8

DI3= 3.2

,';, -~ 9
=2.7
min
J ac
=4.0
: ,._.~ i : _ _
max
o ,
~zo
2 4 6" 8 IO 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
DISTANCE FROM QUENCHED END --SIXTEENTHS OF AN INCH

J. HEAT TREATING VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1--15

 HARDENABILITY BAND 1330 H
Mn i S, [

I 9 I /.3o
t1
O. 3 0 1.75 O. 2 3 0 0 0 7
DIAMETERS OF ROUNDS WITH SAME AS QUENCHED HARDNES~ LOCATION IN ROUND ~UENCH
3.8 SURFACE MILD
I. I 2.0 2.9 3.8 ~.8 5.8 6.7 3/)4 RADIUS FROM CENTER WATER
0.7 1,2 1.6 2.0 2.~ 2.8 3.2 3.6 3.9 CENTER QUENCH
1 1 I I I I I 1 I
0.8 I .8 2.5 3.0 3.tl 3.8 SURFAO,E MILD
0.5 I.O 1.6 2.0 2.LI 2;8 3.2 3 . 8 14.0 ~/U, RADIUS FROM CENTER OIL
0.2 0.6 1.0 I.tl 1.7 2.0 2.1,1 2.8 3. I CENTER QUENCH
(5; - ~ -
_;_ cl 2 5
Fig. 2 3 - - C o m p a r i s o n o f calculated DI = .
80 ,
hardenability with A I S I / S A E H-
band for 1330 H.
.., i
D =1.7
5C
U
D; 3 2 3
i" "
Z40~o [ 9
\ dL =2.0
,( ,) \
rain
-r
%
|
~30 i --3.8
max

U
i --
2 4 6 8 I0 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
DIS'TANCE F R O M Q U E N C H E D END -SIXTEENTHS OF AN INCH

HARDENABILITY BAND 4130 H

I
.2 7//-33 .3o ~ / .70 .,5//..3o 7//I, 20 25

0.30 0.50 0.23 0 0.98 0.20 7

DIAMETERS OF ROUNDS WiTH SAME AS QUENCHED HARDNES': LOCATION IN ROUND QUENCHJ
3.8 SURFACE MILD
I , I 2 . 0 2 . 9 3 . 8 ~.8 5 . 8 6 . 7 3/1,1 RADIUS FROM CENTER WATER
0.7 1.2 I .G 2 . 0 2 . 4 2 . 8 3 , 2 3 . 6 3 . 9 CENTER QUENCH
I I I [ [ I I 1 [
0.8 1.8 2.5 3.0 3.1.1 3 . 8 SURFACE MILD
0.5 1.0 1.6 2.0 2.~ 2 . 8 3.2 3.6 11.0 3/15 RAOIUS FROM CE'NTER OIL
0.2 0.6 1.0 I .11 I .7 2.0 2.1.1 2 . 8 3. I CENTER QUENCH
65 --~
DII= 2.:.3 Fig. 2 4 - - C o m p a r i s o n o f calculated
*a80 i hardenability with A I S I / S A E H-
b a n d for 4130 H.
, ~ 5 5 --'~- c2 2 8
DI = .
o

\ :3= 2.7
" \
Z
a 4( _~_
\
n, :, =1.9
<
T 3: : \ \ rain
"J30
.J " iN =3.3
', max
~25 ;

020 I
2 4 6 8-- I0 12 14 16 18 20 22 7'4 7'6 7'8 30 37'
DISTANCE FROM QUENCHED END -SIXTEENTHS OF AN INCH

1 6 - - V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1 J. H E A T T R E A T I N G
 7.0 --175

6.0 -- t50
2 EXA~IPLES 5 EXAIIPLES 5 EXAMPLES
High
Climax 2 Climax 2 US Steel 3
US Steel 4
5.0 -125 "~
E

>_- Fig. 2 5 - - E v a l u a t i o n o f three hard-

F--

..J .../ enability prediction systems.

.~4.o 100 ~--
7 EXAMPLES 8 EXAt'IPLES 5 EXANPLES

qedi um US Steel 5
Climax 6 Climax 6
Just 4
3.0 US Steel 3 75

2.0 9 EXAMPLES 7 EXAMPLES 2 EXAMPLES 50

Low
Climax 9 C1 imax 3 US Steel 2
Just 4 Just 3
US Steel 1 US Steel 1
1.0 I I I I 25
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Low Medium High
CARBON, PERCENT

o I i

(. ] .

Fig. 2 6 - - C o n s t r u c t i o n for locating

Z the inflection point o f a Jominy
curve (Feldman).

I--"

VELOCITY { L I N E A R ) TIME (LOGARITHMIC)

J. HEAT T R E A T I N G V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1--17
 APPROXIMATE COOLING R A T E . "F PER SECOND AT 13OO F

=i M d
TO
e8 ~

,,-~4=_-..4~.-.~.1 _ _ I ; . ~ _ _3~ , . , ....

I

z -

Ir 4 0
< ~ ---
Z 36 ~*--"---

I; 4"-"~'~6 8 tO 12 1,4 te 111 20 22 24 26 211 30 32 34 36 38 40

DISTANCE FROM QUENCHED END OF SPECIMEN IN SIXTETP'THS OF INCH
Fig. 27--Empirical family of Jominy curves for 0.43 carbon H-steels (Feldman).

were obtained using the U.S. Steel calculator, and hardenability calculated from actual composition and
points designated (e) were calculated using the Just grain size for 50 standard and nonstandard steels vary-
equation given above. ing in carbon content and hardenability. A summary of
The examples given above were part of a larger exer- the work is given in Fig. 25, in which regions of low,
cise in which actual hardenability was compared with medium and high hardenability (expressed in terms of
D1), and regions of low, medium and high carbon con-
tent are delineated. In each region, the systems that were
capable of predicting hardenability are indicated in
terms of the number of examples in which this author
considered the prediction of both Dt and hardness in the
50 to 90 pct martensite range to be adequate 9 These pre-
dictors are underlined. While the results certainly pro-
r 4(2
h-
4330 vide evidence that no one predictor can be used with all
steels, the comparison does provide encouragement that
I
there are useful methods of predicting hardenability--
3C ~...~.~~~.~ -4130
methods which can be used selectively to define the
probable hardenability of a given composition.
The newer computerized methods take advantage of
l selective application of available data. The Minitech
system described in Feldman's paper in the T M S / A I M E
0 ' 8 ' 1'6 ' ~;4 32
book z was developed originally by Kirkaldy to use ther-
DEPTH ( SIXTEENTHS ) modynamic principles in establishing critical cooling
Fig. 28--Comparisons of observed and predicted Jominy curves for
4427, 5130, 4130, and 4330 steels (Feldman). rates for formation of ferrite and pearlite, and, from

18--VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1 J. HEAT TREATING

 700

/ , , , , ,

m 500~
Fig. 29--The effect on the precisely determined
Jominy curve of successive additions of trace
,oo elements (Brown and James).

200 A ~ = I i
0'1 012 i 0=3 04 05
DISTANCE FROM QUENCHED END (,nches)

Compositions

Steel
Code C Mn Si S P Ni Cr Mo Cu Sn
B4 (base) 0.36 0.90 0.28 0.010 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.003 0.002 0.004
B18 0.38 0.86 0.27 0.21
B19 0.38 0.86 0.29 0.30 0.22 0.20
B24 0.39 0.89 0.30 0.32 0.19 0.09 0.21

these, to e s t a b l i s h i n f l e c t i o n p o i n t s in the h a r d e n a b i l i t y pirically to i n c r e a s e the a c c u r a c y o f p r e d i c t i o n . S u b s e -

curves. T h e m e t h o d is i l l u s t r a t e d g r a p h i c a l l y in Fig. 26.
Note that the p o i n t o f m a x i m u m t r a n s f o r m a t i o n veloc-
ity establishes the c o o l i n g rate c o r r e s p o n d i n g to the in-
flection p o i n t o n the h a r d e n a b i l i t y curve. This m e t h o d
o f p r e d i c t i n g i n f l e c t i o n p o i n t s was tested a g a i n s t a large
b a n k o f a v a i l a b l e h a r d e n a b i l i t y d a t a a n d m o d i f i e d era-
q u e n t l y , e n t i r e J o m i n y h a r d e n a b i l i t y curves were pre-
dicted u s i n g the fact t h a t for a given c a r b o n c o n t e n t the
majority of J o m i n y curves generate a rational, n o n i n t e r -
secting set as i l l u s t r a t e d in Fig. 27. O f course, such a set
is n o t u n i v e r s a l l y a p p l i c a b l e ; a l l o y i n g i n f l u e n c e s the
shape o f the curve. H e r e a g a i n , e m p i r i c a l d a t a a r e used

06 ! ! !

o o

05

04

o
~03
Fig. 30--Calculation of Jominy ..d
distance to 450 VPN using Gross- Oo o
mann factors. High purity steels ~- /o
(Brown and James). <02
~o
o/

J
OI

!
O0 I I I 1 I !
Ol 03 05 07 09
PREDICTED (inches)

J. HEAT TREATING VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1--19

 in Figs. 30 and 31. E n c o u r a g e d by the good correlation
Table II. Alternates for A I S I / S A E 8620H obtained in Fig. 31, Brown and James applied their
equations to compositions o f a r a n d o m selection o f
8620H E X 10 EX 15 EX24 commercial steels, but met with much less success. Ad-
Midrange Composition ditional work led them to develop a system of empirical
Pct C 0.20 0.22 0.20 0.20 equations, one for each o f the several standard British
Pct Mn 0.78 1.10 1.05 0.88 steels. This approach worked quite well, and GKN has
Pct Si 0.23 0.28 0.27 0.28
adopted it for their proprietary prediction system.
Pct Ni 0.55 0.30 0.03 --
Pct Cr 0.50 0.33 0.50 0.55 The " c o m p u t e r h a r m o n i z e d " (CH) portion o f the
Pct Mo 0.20 0.08 0.16 0.25 International Harvester C H A T system can be used to
Midrange Hardenability define a least-cost steel to meet established hardenability
DtB 1.7 1.6 2.1 1.8 requirements, or to define a replacement steel which will
D1c 5.4 3.8 4.7 5.5
duplicate the carbon content, hardenability characteris-
tics and transformation characteristics very closely.
Computer methods make it possible to take into account
in the Minitech proprietary system to classify steels by several objectives simultaneously, such as equivalent
their characteristic J o m i n y curve shape and predictions base hardenability (Dis) and equivalent case hardenabil-
are accurately made within that classification. An exam- ity (D1c) at least cost. T o do this by trial and error would
ple o f the success o f the m e t h o d is given in Fig. 28. require considerably more effort. The C H A T system
Brown and James ~6 at G K N developed a systematic uses the base hardenability factors of deRetana and
prediction system, first using a series of high purity Doane, 8 case hardenability factors o f Jatczak, 9 and Ms
steels, the compositions and hardenability curves o f temperature equations developed by Andrews ~7 for the
which are given in Fig. 29. Brown and James used a base composition and by P a y s o n and Savage ~8 for the
hardness level o f 450 HV as the hardenability criterion case composition. Examples o f the use of the C H A T
and attempted to calculate J o m i n y distances to that system are given in Refs. 1 and 2. In one example the
hardness using G r o s s m a n n techniques, then with a following requirements and restrictions were placed on
" s i m p l e " computer regression analysis developed on the steel to be used for a heavy rear axle hypoid pinion
the basis of a series o f 24 l a b o r a t o r y steels. The results as a result of A T considerations:
of comparisons with actual hardenability data are given Carbon content 0.26 pct min. (0.31 pct max.)

06 I I I l I

04
o -
o/

o,o "
(.l
t-
Fig. 3 1 - - C o r r e l a t i o n o f J o m i n y distance to 450 V P N us-
ing " s i m p l e " c o m p u t e r regression equation (Brown and
_I
James).

F- 0
~02

OC I 1 I I I
02 04 0.6
PREDICTED (inches)

2 0 - - V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1 J. H E A T T R E A T I N G
 Dia = 3.8 in. (97 m m ) " E X " grades developed in recent years using any o f
Dic = 5.0 in. (127 m m ) several empirical methods. F o u r alternate steels have
C h r o m i u m content 0.90 pct max. been p r o p o s e d for the p o p u l a r N i - C r - M o carburizing
Manganese content 1.00 pct max. steel A I S I / S A E 8620H. The alternates are c o m p a r e d in
M o l y b d e n u m content 0.08 pct rain. m i d r a n g e c o m p o s i t i o n and m i d r a n g e base and case
Silicon content 0.30 pct m a x . hardenability in Table II. It is evident that the p r o p o s e d
With this i n f o r m a t i o n , the c o m p u t e r selected the follow- steels are nearly equivalent in DtB but differ considerably
ing least cost analysis: 0.26 pct C, 1.0 pct Mn, 0.15 pct in D1c. T o check the a d e q u a c y o f these steels to meet
Si, 0.90 pct Cr, 0.36 pct M o and no nickel. case hardenability requirements, H a l l o c k ~9 prepared
Other examples of " r e p l a c e m e n t steels" are the SAE experimental heats o f " l o w s i d e " and " h i g h side" com-

DISTANCE FROM QUENCHED END OF SPECIMEN IN M I L L I M E T E R S

5 i0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
70 I I I I I I I
65

60
LAJ
55
r - " ~ " ~ . EX24
to 50 \ x16 . ==_. _._

ua 45
Z
EXIO - -- "-" -.~ Fig. 32--0.90 pct C case hardenability compar-
"~ 40
ison (low-side chemistry) (Hallock).
35
~ 3o -- 8600
I I
E X I O EX24 E X I 5 -
~ 25 - - D I c 5.2 4.0 5.8 5.1 -
%Hn 0.76 1.03 0.84 0.96
~ 20 --%Si 0.26 0.30 0.31 0.29-
%Ni 0.49 0.25 0.06 --
15 --%Cr 0.45 0.32 0.49 0.44-
%Mo 0.18 0.07 0.23 0.17
10 --G.S. 7.0 7.5 8.5 7.0 -
I I I I I I I
2 4 6 8 i0 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 40
DISTANCE FROM QUENCHED END OF SPECIMEN IN SIXTEENTHS OF INCH

DISTANCE FROM QUENCHED END OF SPECIMEN IN M I L L I M E T E R S

5 iO 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60
I I I I I
70
_,x!,_ .......... t I l Ill
65
- . . . . . . . a_
60
x2 /I --'-----4--
~ 55
U
~ 50 "~', EXIO

'"
z
45
Fig. 33--0.90 pct C case hardenability compar- ~ 4D
<
ison (high-side chemistry) (Hallock). -e-
35

~i , i 30 t
8600 E X I O E X 2 4 EX15
~
v
25
~DIc 7.9 6.2 8.2 6.7
%Mn 0.84 1.20 0.98 I.I0
~ 20 --%Si 0.32 0.35 0.32 0.32
%Ni 0.64 0.34 0.19 --
15 --%Cr 0.60 0.40 0.58 0.51
%Mo 0.23 0.II 0.29 0.19
10
--G.S. 7.5 7.5 8.5 7.5
I I I I I I I
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38 4 0
DISTANCE FROM QUENCHED END OF SPECIMEN IN SIXTEENTHS OF INCH

J. H E A T T R E A T I N G V O L U M E 1, NUMBER 1--21
 .8
~ C u ' ' ; ' '

Z ~

0 5

Fig. 3 4 - - T h e influence of the alloying elements

on the eutectoid temperature a n d carbon con-
IZ~)O / l I I I I tent. Solid lines are representing the equilib-
rium state according to the reviewed calcula-
tions whereas the dashed lines are taken f r o m
Bain (Uhrenius).

I f

,•1200 J
f

~- 1 0 0 0
_--- ~ ,---.- _~ Ni Mn

; I .. "J":-'--. , "-- ,"7" --.....

5
ALLOYING ELEMENT WT-%

positions o f the four steels,* and determined harden-
* " L o w s i d e " c o m p o s i t i o n is one-quarter o f the n o r m a l range o f
each element below the m i d r a n g e c o m p o s i t i o n a n d " h i g h s i d e " com-
position is o n e - q u a r t e r o f the n o r m a l range o f each element above the
midrange c o m p o s i t i o n .
ability o f carburized end-quench bars. The results, when
the bars were g r o u n d to depths corresponding to 0.9 pct
C in the case, are given in Figs. 32 and 33. The results
confirmed the calculations that the EX10 is not an ade-
quate " r e p l a c e m e n t " for 8620, on the basis o f case
hardenability.
PREDICTING CRITICAL TEMPERATURES AND
CARBON GRADIENTS
Quite useful guidelines for heat treatment can
found in the studies of phase equilibria in iron-base
loys by Hillert, by Uhrenius, and by Kirkaldy et al in
T M S / A I M E book. 2 The t h e r m o d y n a m i c studies
Uhrenius resulted in new data on the influence of the
alloying elements on the eutectoid temperature and car-
bon content. A comparison o f the Uhrenius results with
those published by Bain and Paxton 2~are given in Fig. 34.
Among the several useful predictions available in the
Minitech system, Feldman 2 described the capability of
using diffusion data to predict carbon distributions
resulting from carburizing steels of various alloy con-
tents. Two examples are given here. In the first example,
Fig. 35, a series o f carbon gradients were predicted for a
Cr-Ni steel, and then checked against observed data
resulting from a standard carburizing operation. It is
possible to predict carbon gradients for a two-step car-
burization process as well. The results o f predictions o f
both carbon distribution and hardness resulting from a
two-step carburizing process are shown in Fig. 36. The
be predicted carbon gradient curves follow the observed
al- data quite well through the first portion o f the case, and
the fall only slightly below the actual data at intermediate
of carbon levels.

2 2 - - V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1 J. H E A T T R E A T I N G
 9 , , , -1 7 0 30 NC 11 AfterlRSID
I CO,o ~Mo%i s,ojoi s% l po;o i N,o,o i c,o,o ,Moo,,;ooo, o~ As~ I
O32 !o3o o ,o To 7 i 2.95 [ 0.69 0,3, ?,056 I
o~ ~ _ ~ ~~4,o Austenitized at 850~ Grain size :12
J
tlJ
900~
3O 9
~J 80O \ ~.'\ \, ~-\
CHROMIUM - N I C K E L STEEL 2o ~
o e % CARBON PGTENTIAL IN GAS Ac~ ( -
0 8 ~ PREDICTED I0
9 o OBSERVED
O 6oo \, ',,

\'\~'\,
13)

06
Z o
(1)
0
r
~r
CL 500400
o 4 IO MRS
E
O
u 04 F-

I-
3oOMso ..... ~\ ~ - - - ~ ~
,.-,02 200 M
M9o
C A S E D E P T H BY H A R R I S FORMUL&
I IB, ~5.bO AND 79 THOU, RESPECIIVELY
100
0 [ l 1 1 I
0 20 40 60 BO IO0 l i I I I
P f NET RAT ION ( T housondlh$ ) 1 10 100 103 104 105
Fig. 35--Comparison of observations and predictions for the surface
carbon dependence of diffusion penetration (Feldman). Seconds Time l m n 2mn 15ran l h h 4hBh 2 h
Fig. 37--I.R.S.I.D. CCT diagram of 30 NC 11 steel.

- i t ! , 70 PREDICTING AND USING CONTINUOUS

60
COOLING TRANSFORMATION DATA
u~
50 The study of transformation kinetics under condi-
tions of continuous cooling has rewarded the investiga-
40 -= tors and users with data which can be applied to real
(J
12 30 _J
heat treatment conditions. The ASM book ~ explains
how continuous cooling transformation (CCT) dia-
CHROMIUM-NICKEL STEEL 20
grams are constructed and how they may be used. The
(J
PREDICTED I0 o paper by Eldis in the T M S / A I M E book 2 summarizes the
9 A o OBSERVED

B•
sources of C C T diagrams and discusses the application
0
of C C T diagrams to commercial practice. Throughout
~oa the world there are now a very large number of C C T
2 HRS AT 1 3 % C
diagrams available. Many of these were generated in
J I H R AT 0.7 %C
response to a need for transformation data on a specific
composition or commercial grade of steel, but many
diagrams were generated to study the effect of varying
2H.S .T,3.C alloying elements. In several publications, the latest be-
~0 %C ing in the T M S / A I M E b o o k , 2 Maynier and coworkers
have developed a systematic analysis of C C T diagrams
and have generated regression equations from European
HRS.AT I3 ~C ~ ~ ' ~ - . . _ ~ diagrams which make it possible to predict transforma-
tion behavior, for a given composition, grain size and
CASE DEPTHS BY HARRIS FORMULA
3 5 , 4 3 AND 5 0 THOU , RESPECTIVELY austenitizing condition. A typical diagram, and charac-
I I I I teristic critical cooling programs, from the work of
0 20 40 60 80 IO0
PENETRATION (Thousondth$)
Maynier et a! are shown in Fig. 37. The critical cooling
Fig. 36--Comparison of observations and predictions for a two-step programs, designated by V, the rate of cooling at
carburization process (Feldman). 700 ~ are:

J. HEAT TREATING VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1--23

 VI, the martensitic critical cooling velocity; the mini-
mum quench rate to give an entirely martensitic struc-
ture (or a mixture o f martensite and retained austenite),
I/2, the bainitic critical cooling velocity; the minimum
quench rate to give a structure entirely free f r o m ferrite
or pearlite (a structure o f bainite with or without mar-
tensite and retained austenite),
V3, the critical cooling velocity to attain a fully an-
nealed structure free from bainite (a structure compris-
ing entirely ferrite and pearlite)
Other intermediate critical velocities can be useful. For
example V~ (50) is the critical cooling velocity which
results in 50 pct martensite and 50 pct bainite (or other
higher t e m p e r a t u r e transformation products). Maynier
and coworkers have developed regression equations
which can be used to predict these critical cooling veloci-
ties f r o m composition. The form o f the equations can
best be shown by example. The martensitic critical cool-
ing velocity in ~ with compositions in wt pct, and
P, (the austenitizing parameter, a separate equation in-
volving temperature and time) is given by the equation:
fluential in controlling completion of the bainitic reac-
tion to permit fully annealed structures o f ferrite and
pearlite (I/3). M o l y b d e n u m is shown to be more effec-
tive in suppressing ferrite or pearlite (V2) than in sup-
pressing bainite (V 0.
A somewhat similar analysis o f the US data has been
undertaken by Eldis 2 but is at present in the preliminary
stages. Nevertheless, these preliminary equations,
shown in Table IV, provide additional and comparative
information regarding the influence o f alloys on inhibit-
ing nonmartensitic reactions. Shown in the table are
equations for Ac,, Ac3, Ms, as well as expressions simi-
lar to those designated V~ and I"2 by Maynier.
It is, of course, impossible to provide in this paper the
detail required to use the results of the extensive work
that has been done in the last several years in defining
CCT characteristics o f steels. This author can only urge
review o f the diagrams and the papers describing their
use.
PREDICTING MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

log Vl = 9.81 - (4.62C pct + 1.05Mn pct + 0.54Ni pct +
0.50Cr pct + 0.66Mo pct + 0.00183 P,)
Coefficients for several such equations are summarized
in Table Ill. The influence of elements on various trans-
formation reactions is indicated by the magnitude of the
coefficients. These are revealing. Carbon, o f course, is
most effective in inhibiting transformation and least in-
In the T M S / A I M E book, 2 papers by Pickering and
by Krauss describe the relationship between microstruc-
ture and mechanical properties. Predicting mechanical
properties of steels as a function o f their chemical com-
position and heat treatment is seen by several workers as
the next step in utilizing the fund o f knowledge that has
been developed in metallurgy over the years. The results
of work by Maynier and coworkers in France, Kirkaldy

Table III. Constants and Coefficients in Critical Velocity Equations (Maynier et al)

Pa No.
Constant C Mn Ni Cr Mo ~ h Equations 2a

Log 1/1 9.81 4.62 1.10 0.54 0.50 0.66 0.0018 63 0.49

Log ~90) 8.76 4.04 0.96 0.49 0.58 0.97 0.0010 74 0.54

Log IAll5~ 8.50 4.13 0.86 0.57 0.41 0.94 0.0012 80 0.61

Log V2 10.17 3.80 1.07 0.70 0.57 1.58 0.0032 82 0.60

Log V2(9~ 10.55 3.65 1.08 0.77 0.61 1.49 0.0040 90 0.82

Log V2(~~ 8.74 2.23 0.86 0.56 0.59 1.60 0.0032 102 0.90

Log V3(9~ 7.51 1.38 0.35 0.93 0.11 2.31 0.0033 63 0.80

0.38Mo
Log V3 6.36 0.43 0.49 0.78 0.26 + 2x/M~ 0.0019 71 0.51

Log 1/700 or = (Kp.P pct) with P = C, M n , Ni, Cr, M o , V, P a . Valid for all low alloyed steels (except XN, the nickel steels)

2 4 - - V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1 J. H E A T T R E A T I N G
 Table IV. Results of Multiple Linear Regression of Data for Microalloy Free and Boron Free Steels (Eldis)

R e g r e s s i o n M o d e l : Y = 1 . C + rn.Si + n . M n + p . M o + q.Cr + r.Ni + constant

Composition Range of Observations (wt pct):

C = 0.09/0.81 Si = 0 . 0 2 / 1 . 4 9 Mn = 0.35/1.79 Mo = 0/0.92 Cr =0/1.55 Ni= 0/4.56

Dependent Variable E q u a t i o n a n d S t a t i s t i c s ( A l l o y C o n t e n t s in w t p c t )

ACl, ~ A c I = 20.1 Si - 17.8 M n - 9 . 8 M o + 11.9 C r - 19.1 N i + 7 1 2

N o . o f O b s e r v a t i o n s = 174
M i n i m u m S i g n i f i c a n c e L e v e l a = 0.01
Multiple Correlation Coefficient = 0.925
S t a n d a r d E r r o r o f E s t i m a t e = 11.8 ~

Ac3, ~ A c 3 = - 2 5 4 . 4 C + 5 1 . 7 Si - 14.2 Ni + 871

N o . o f O b s e r v a t i o n s = 174
Minimum Significance Level = 0.001
Multiple Correlation Coefficient = 0.839
Standard Error of Estimate = 23.6 ~

Ms~ ~ Ms = - 3 9 1 . 2 C - 4 3 . 3 M n - 16.2 C r - 2 1 . 8 Ni + 531

N o . o f O b s e r v a t i o n s = 142
Minimum Significance Level = 0.001
Multiple Correlation Coefficient = 0.948
S t a n d a r d E r r o r o f E s t i m a t e = 15.6 ~
log B a i n i t e T i m e b in s log B a i n i t e T i m e = 1 . 0 9 4 C + 0 . 3 2 1 Si + 1 . 4 0 7 M n + 1 . 7 7 2 M o + 1 . 0 5 0 C r + 0 . 6 3 2 Ni - 1 . 8 4 9
N o . o f O b s e r v a t i o n s = 126
Minimum Significance Level = 0.025
Multiple Correlation Coefficient = 0.899
Standard Error of Estimate = 0.468
log P e a r l i t e T i m e c in s log P e a r l i t e T i m e = 1 . 2 5 9 C + 1.231 M n + 2 . 3 3 9 M o + 0 . 4 4 5 C r + 0 . 4 8 4 Ni - 0 . 7 1 1
N o . o f O b s e r v a t i o n s = 150
Minimum Significance Level = 0.001
Multiple Correlation Coefficient = 0.854
Standard Error of Estimate = 0.506

a M i n i m u m s i g n i f i c a n c e level = s i g n i f i c a n c e level o f l e a s t s i g n i f i c a n t c o e f f i c i e n t .
b B a i n i t e t i m e = p o s i t i o n o f b a i n i t e n o s e o n t i m e axis.
cpearlite time = position of the nose of high temperature transformation (ferrite/pearlite) on time axis.

and Feldman in C a n a d a , Hernacki and W a r d as well as in the T M S / A I M E b o o k . 2 T h e Creusot-Loire system

Breen and c o w o r k e r s in the US have also been included described by Maynier et al can be used to define p r o d u c t
characteristics, as indicated by the flow d i a g r a m s h o w n
in Fig. 38. The cooling rates for various quenched sec-
I Thickness- Diameter 1 Chemical
tions have been r e a s o n a b l y established, as shown in Fig.
Quenching Severity Composition
39 for the center o f quenched rounds and in Fig. 40 for
the midthickness o f plates.
Cooling Rate [Critical Quench Velocities I As a first step in predicting mechanical properties
Maynier has developed equations for predicting hard-
II ness before and a f t e r tempering, with the knowledge o f
Quenched Structure cooling rates and c o m p o s i t i o n . The hardness o f as-
quenched martensite is expressed by the equation:
Hardness Hardness
~ [ Addition Rule
Martensite Martensite
Bainite HVmartensite = 127 + 949C + 27Si + 11Mn +
Bainite
Ferrire Product Characteristics Ferrite
Pearlite 8Ni + 16Cr + 21 log Vr
Pearlite
HV-HRC-HB-YS-YS.2%-UTS
Before After where V, is the cooling rate in ~
Temper E%, Red. Area % Temper
F i g . 3 8 - - F l o w d i a g r a m o f t h e p r e d i c t i o n s y s t e m ( M a y n i e r et al). (2a is 26 H V for this equation)

J. H E A T T R E A T I N G VOLUME 1, N U M B E R 1--25
 A s e c o n d f o r m u l a f o r t h e h a r d n e s s o f b a i n i t e (free f r o m
ferrite or m a r t e n s i t e ) w a s m o r e d i f f i c u l t to d e v e l o p , b u t
REFERENCES with c a r e f u l l y c h o s e n d a t a t a k e s t h e f o r m :
~RSKD
100000 ~NCO
GARCON HVba~.i, e = 323 + 185C + 330Si + 153Mn +
STEVEN & MAYER
C R E U S O ~ - LOIRE
0 65Ni + 144Cr + 1 9 1 M o + log Vr
O
v
(89 + 53C - 55Si - 2 2 M n - 10Ni - 2 0 C r - 3 3 M o )
9
O
10000
o (2o is 20 H V f o r this e q u a t i o n )

#. Water A t h i r d f o r m u l a f o r t h e h a r d n e s s o f ferrite plus p e a r l i t e

t a k e s the f o r m :
6 1000
O
H V ( f e r r i t e + pearlile) = 42 + 2 2 3 C + 53Si + 3 0 M n +

12.6Ni + 7 C r + 1 9 M o + log II,

c
(10 - 19Si + 4 N i + 8Cr + 130V)
o
O 100
O (2a is 13 H V f o r this e q u a t i o n )

F o r t e m p e r e d steels M a y n i e r d e v e l o p e d o t h e r e q u a -
tions which t a k e i n t o a c c o u n t t h e " s o f t e n i n g p o i n t "
10t - r"--
0 20 40 100 200 400 1000 2 0 0 0 which he d e s c r i b e s as c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a n d r e l a t i v e l y i n d e -
p e n d e n t o f the q u e n c h e d s t r u c t u r e . A s a t i s f a c t o r y c o n -
D i a m e t e r in m.m.
Fig. 39--Cooling rate at the center of bars cooled in air or quenched in d e n s a t i o n o f this w o r k is n o t p o s s i b l e in this review
water and oil as a function of diam in mm. paper.
M a y n i e r a n d c o w o r k e r s g o o n to d e v e l o p r e g r e s s i o n
e q u a t i o n s for tensile s t r e n g t h a n d yield s t r e n g t h . A n in-
d i c a t i o n o f the success w i t h t h e i r m e t h o d s is given in
Fig. 41 in w h i c h c a l c u l a t e d y i e l d s t r e n g t h is c o m p a r e d

10 5.
9 Bamdlc Steels
O Ba~mtlc C N D Steels
9 Balmtcc C M D Steels
O 80. A Bamthc M O V Steels

O
r-.- 104"
c~
70
%
E
CI2
~ 103. Air r 60 84
-6 O'3
>-
o
0

50 84
102
C)
N--95
X=1,3
40 2o-= 7,4 k g / m m ~

6 10 20 40 60 100 200 40 50 60 70

Thickness in m m Measured YSin kg/mm 2

Fig. 40--Cooling rates of plates in air, and water, as a function of Fig. 41--Application to plates (quenched and tempered). Structure is
gage in ram. bainitic.

26--VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1 J. HEAT TREATING

 |, , ... J
MILL
DATA

! 1
LOW
CAR8OR
M~ I
CARBON .

i
OUENCH Fig. 42--Chrysler computerized steel selector.
AND
1EMPER

I I
I THERMALLY
DEVELOPED
1 ~MECHANICALLY
[ o,vEto,~o [
( I
I RAW [ [ pR0ctss,,o ]
MATERIAL

with measured yield strength in quenched and tempered
bainitic plates.
Hernacki and Ward of Chrysler Corporation in the
US have adopted the Minitech system and have ex-
panded it to provide mechanical property data. Their
system is described in the TMS/AIME book. 2 A sche-
matic of the Chrysler system is shown in Fig. 42, and an
example of mechanical properties print-out from the
computer is shown in Fig. 43. This is a good example of
providing ready access to data in response to questions
raised by designers and materials engineers.
Hildenwall and Ericsson of Link6ping University,

r H I 5 SECTION ENABLES THE USER TO PICK THE TEST DESIRED

TO SELECT THE TEST, TYPE IN THE NUMBER ~IUEH BELOW
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES = TYPE )
QUENCH AND TEMPER PROPERTIES = 3
HADENABILITY 9 H-BANDS 9 4
COST FOR 1 STEEL = 5
COST FOR NORE THAN 1 STEEL =6 . . . . 1

C MN P S SI HI CR MO
.36e .65e .825 .928 . 159 .e86 . 915 .984

UTS BH FSN FSS K N R~ YS

HOT ROLLED PROPERTIES
69.458 162.269 1.131 157.761 124.577 .243 46.737 43.331

SPHEROIDIZED PROPERTIES
59.853 118.448 .917 11e.955 119.932 .247 53.~38 29.935

WOULD YOU LIKE TO RUN RNOTHER TEST ON THIS CHENISTRY?

IF YES ENTER 1 , I F NO ENTER 2 . . . .
Fig. 43--Mechanical properties o u t p u t (Hernacki and Ward).

J. H E A T T R E A T I N G V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1--27
Sweden, in consultation with Volvo, have developed a
program which incorporates mechanical and thermal
properties o f steels and which generates stress distribu-
tions in carburized and heat treated parts. This is a pow-
erful method for new designs and may eventually lead to
a model for predicting distortion resulting from heat
treatment. Two figures help to illustrate the capability
o f the system. Diagrams of CCT behavior as a function
o f carbon content have been developed for some steels
by Rose and Hougardy. n Knowledge of the effect of
alloys on transformation of the base steel and the effect
of carbon on the Ms temperature at various locations in
the case, as shown in Fig. 44, is the first step in estimat-
ing stresses.
For quantitative prediction of residual stresses one
must consider temperature gradients developed by
quenching (influenced by quenching severity, thermal
conductivity, heat capacity, heat of transformation and
density o f the steel), the phase transformations, and the
mechanical properties at various temperatures. All such
considerations, carefully integrated, result in calcula-
tions of residual stress that take the form of Fig. 45,
which shows the calculated residual stresses in plates of
A IS I /S AE 1321 steel carburized to various surface car-
bon contents. The technique also permits estimating re-
tained austenite in a carburized case. The calculated
stresses have been shown to be in good agreement with
experimental experience, and confirm earlier experi-
mental work and theoretical developments.
900
8O0
700
o6OO
d
= 500
a. 400
E 70O
I,,-,
3O0
200
100
0 200
0.1 1 10 100
Time, seconds
2 8 - - V O L U M E 1, N U M B E R 1
SUMMARY
It is the author's opinion that there are several fairly
accurate procedures available for estimating heat treat-
ment response in steel from hardenability data and from
continuous cooling transformation data, and for esti-
mating critical heat treatment temperatures from chemi-
cal composition. The methods available for predicting
hardenability and hardness from composition and grain
size are also very useful if developed for a limited class
of steels, and are quite accurate if used to predict the ef-
fect of minor changes in composition for a given steel.
The newer methods for predicting mechanical proper-
ties from composition and microstructure hold great
promise, but require more development and testing be-
fore accurate predictions are possible.
More studies of the interaction of alloys and the influ-
ence of minor elements on hardenability are required
before a comprehensive set of predictive equations for
hardenability can be established. These studies will take
two forms. One is the detailed statistical analysis o f ex-
isting hardenability data, and the other involves gener-
ating new data using statistically designed grids o f
alloys. This author is aware of plans for and progress in
both types of studies. It is hoped that others will see the
need for such data and that the work can be shared on a
worldwide basis.
It is evident, from work to date, that the metallurgist
involved in alloy design cannot consider hardenability
1500
1300
1100 t,.
Fig. 4 4 - - T r a n s f o r m a t i o n in carburized 50 m m
IV
diam bars o f Ck 15, 20 M o C r 4 a n d N i M o C r 6
~. steels (Rose a n d Hougardy).
p-
500
300
1000
J. H E A T T R E A T I N G
 400

"I=:
.5 ( ".." . I.f 2. 2.5
,d
ee-
l,.,-
//,,
,=C
== '!/ |

I: Fig. 4 5 - - T h e calculated residual stresses in a

LL'
I : carburized plate of SAE 1321 with different
e;] i surface carbon contents (Hildenwall and
Ericsson).
-tOO

/ i41/ ' .2%C ,

, .8%C
I P I

I!/ ,.
-101
t is I/

DEPI"H.mm

as an isolated p r o p e r t y o f steel. The effect of alloy mod-
ifications to enhance hardenability or to provide the
same hardenability at lower cost must be considered in
the full knowledge o f the effects of alloys on the proper-
ties of the different microstructures generated in the
steel. Such properties include machinability, fatigue,
toughness, strength at elevated temperatures, as well as
interactive properties such as distortion and thermal
fatigue.
REFERENCES
I. C. A. Siebert, D. V. Doane, and D. H. Breen: The Hardenability
of Steels--Concepts, Metallurgical Influences, and Industrial Ap-
plications, American Society for Metals, Metals Park, Ohio,
1977.
2. Douglas V. Doane and J o h n S. Kirkaldy, editors: Hardenability
Concepts with Applications to Steel, The Metallurgical
Society/AIME, New York, 1978.
3. D. J. Carney: Trans. ASM, 1954, vol. 46, pp, 882-927.
4. R. A. Grange: Met. Trans., 1973, vol. 4, p. 2231.
5. M. A. Grossmann: Trans. A1ME, 1942, vol. 150, pp. 227-55.
6. I. R. Kramer, S. Siegel, and J. G. Brooks: Trans. AIME, 1946,
vol. 167, p. 670.
7. M. A. Grossmann: Elements ofHardenability, ASM, Cleveland,
1952.
8. A. F. deRetana and D.V. Doane: Met. Progr., 1971, vol. 100, p.
65.
9, C. F. Jatczak: Met. Trans., 1973, vol. 4, p. 2272.
10, D. T. Lewellyn and W. T. Cook: Met. Tech., 1974, p. 517.
11, A. Moser and A. Legat: Berg Huettenmaenn. Monatsh., 1967,
vol. l l 2 , pp. 321-31.
12. J. Glen: British Iron and Steel Institute Special Report 36, p.
356ff, 1945.
13. J. Orlich: Harterei-Technische Mitteilungen, 1974, vol. 29, no. 4,
p. 231.

J. HEAT T R E A T I N G VOLUME 1, N U M B E R 1--29

14. J. M. Hodge and M. A. Orehoski: Trans. A I M E , 1946, vol. 167,
pp. 627-42.
15. E. Just: Met. Progr., 1969, p. 87.
16. G. T. Brown and B. A. James: Met. Trans., 1973, vol. 4, p. 2245.
17. K. W. Andrews: Am. Iron Steel Inst., 1975.
18. P. Payson and C. H. Savage: Trans. A S M , 1944, vol. 33.
30--VOLUME 1, NUMBER 1
19. J. W. Hallock: Climax Molybdenum Co. Progress Report
L-193-77, April 5, 1971.
20. E. Bain and H. Paxton: Alloying Elements in Steel, 2nd Ed.
ASM, Metals Park, OH, 1961.
21. A. Rose and H. P. Hougardy: Atlas zur Wiirmbehandlung der
Sti~hle, vol. 2, Verlag Stahleisen M.B.H., Dtisseldorf, 1972.
J. HEAT TREATING