FEATURED NEWS

Changing the In-Line Heat Treating Paradigm

Evolution of ideas and transitions to more innovative and efficient methods of heat treating are common themes in this ever-changing world. In this article, Dennis Beauchesne, General Manager at ECM USA, Inc., explores the integration of heat treatment for in-line machining cells and the benefits and efficiencies experienced.

This article article first appeared in the latest edition (June 2020) of Heat Treat Today’s Automotive Heat Treat  magazine.


Introduction

Dennis Beauchesne, General Manager, ECM-USA, Inc.

Heat treating in the automotive industry has evolved tremendously over the last 20 years.  From the dinosaur pusher furnaces of yesterday to the low-pressure carburizing and high-pressure gas quenching of today, we are now embarking on new concepts with not only in-line processing, but also automated single piece and bulk loading in small batches. Modern heat-treating equipment is now being sized to fit into single-piece flow lines with small batches and in-line with pre- and post-machining centers. This article will examine the integration of heat treatment for in-line machining cells, and the influences for the customer to provide an overall quality system. These details will be compared to batch or continuous batch heat treatment as commonly known in the automotive industry.

Over the last 20 years, low pressure vacuum carburizing (LPC) has been proven as the choice for carburizing high production parts in a variety of markets all over the world. It is the process of choice for many high-fatigue and low-distortion parts; thus, it can be used in conjunction with vacuum oil quenching (VOQ) and, in most cases, high pressure gas quenching (HPGQ). Advantages of this process include the fact that equipment is more easily maintainable, flexible, and independent from operators’ intervention than traditional atmosphere carburizing. In addition, reduction of effluents from the process are significantly decreased. A benefit of this process is that the furnace equipment is used more along the lines of a machining cell, which has most commonly been reserved for induction heat treating in the past. With the added benefits of LPC, the importance of strength and fatigue life have increased beyond previous process capabilities; in turn, LPC in-line processing has been considered more frequently.

The rapid shut-down/cool-down (5-6 hours) of a vacuum system is a significant advantage compared to the convoluted days of cooling an atmosphere system. Simply shutting down one day per week due to scheduled maintenance, without the need for supervision, or use of additional utilities required for idling during downtime, is also highly desirable. Other facets of the equipment and process have allowed vacuum furnace equipment to be more conducive to high production manufacturing. This includes recipe ease, process repeatability, and load-to-load processing flexibility in a continuous flow environment. These additional benefits allow the use of part-specific “recipes” while allowing for high production through the system and insuring individual metallurgical requirements.

High pressure gas quenching (HPGQ), using a dedicated quenching cell, is often linked with LPC for several reasons. Some of the most important reasons are:

  • to provide a cleaner environment in the plant
  • to remove oil-quenching tanks and the need for oil on a production floor
  • to eliminate the need for pits in the floor or managing oil containment
  • to obtain a safer, more ergonomic environment via the elimination of open flame and hot surfaces
  • to achieve more precise distortion control of dimensionally critical parts
  • to reduce or eliminate post-heat treat machining needs
  • to eliminate post-heat treat blasting (for cleanup)
  • to eliminate post-heat treat washing (for quench oil removal)
  • to eliminate post-heat treat washer effluent (sludge) removal

Plan view of in-line heat treatment system

 ECM Technologies has been manufacturing LPC and HPGQ systems for over 25 years and designed an innovative in-line system, called NANO.  The name NANO is appropriate in terms of the equipment design as the load size is smaller than traditional loads and the physical equipment is more compact than furnaces more commonly used today.  The system has also been designed with maintenance and expandability in mind. The premise of the design is to be able to process loads as quickly as

In-line heat treatment system being fully-tested prior to shipment to customer

every 7.5 minutes per load. The system is modular in production capacity with growth from three to six heating cells, which can be supplied. The system is ready for a low number of loads, with flexible needs for varying part requirements, or can be maximized to provide throughput for modern high-demand production needs. The NANO consists of four basic modules, the heating module (typically two), the transfer module, and the high-pressure gas quench module. The gas quench module uses a 20 bar gas quench system. With a smaller chamber size and the ability to quench at 20 bar, materials that were not able to be quenched in gas are now applicable for gas quenching. This gas-quenching method will open up this technology to more applications that were limited by core and surface hardness requirements in the past.

 

Figure 1. - In-line heat treat installation showing automated robotic loading/unloading

 

Using the NANO as the heat treat equipment base, automation completes the overall single- piece flow system to provide true in-line heat treating. The parts can be presented to the system in bulk or in single-piece trays. These parts can then be loaded and virtually tracked through the system using vison systems.

In-line heat treat installation showing robotic arm facilitating automated loading/unloading

The NANO accommodates a workload size of 24” wide x 20” deep x 10” high (600mm wide x 500mm deep x 250mm high); see Figure 1. Workload parts can be processed on industry-typical alloy fixturing or more preferably on CFC fixtures. The goal of designing the system, beyond better maintenance accessibility and gradual production increase, is low distortion and in-line production flow.

By processing loads with less work pieces, part uniformity and distortion are identical from part to part as the “3D” or 3-sided heating elements heat the parts uniformly and homogenously. These elements are designed not to sag onto the parts and provide adequate clearance for the automated loader to perform accurate transfers within the system.

Automation and Integration

The system has been designed for manual or automated loading. Manual loading can be as simple as manually loading basic fixtures or baskets, and manually loading through the system and subsequent processes. Automated loading can be from a simple robot platform that loads parts onto a small fixture from a single part flow to the handling of many pieces in a bulk load. The robot can handle all functions of the installation from loading single parts on to the fixture to placing the loads in the furnace, and then, cryogenic treatment, tempering and eventually back to a single-piece flow. The system is also capable of checking surface hardness and registering the data to be kept with the load report. This total integration can allow for a smaller footprint and less manpower in the heat treat area.

In addition, automation can handle typical small bulk-loaded parts. Some of these parts are traditionally processed using mesh belt furnaces but can now be processed by this vacuum furnace in-line system. Bulk loads are loaded into basket-like CFC trays and can be weighed and processed as needed to ensure the quality of each load.

 

Low pressure carburizing installation showing easy access for maintenance

In-line heat treating is not just for carburized products, it can be for hardening, brazing, annealing, and integrated with post treatments—such as cryogenic and complex tempering operations. This allows the NANO to fit into various markets for many different types of heat treatments, not only steel parts, but for special heat-treating processes as well.

Equipment layouts are typically developed to accommodate specific applications. They can be as simple as a manual load station to a robot loading single-piece flow parts onto smaller fixtures or loading bulk parts into baskets for processing.

Maintenance Features

In-line processing, as well as bulk processing, together with automation to load and unload single-piece production are not the only key items in this design. Maintenance and operation were high on the list of criteria as well. Maintenance features such as ease of access are important on production equipment, but especially within heat treating. With the smaller load sizes and equipment, cool-down is significantly faster resulting from the smaller, water-cooled heating zones. Once cooled and released to atmospheric pressure, the system can then be opened via the full opening maintenance access door for easy, internal service effort. However, this is rare because all mechanisms that require control and quick review are located on the exterior of the system and outside the vacuum chamber. This allows for ease of access to all major components and reduces the need to stop or interrupt production.  Additionally, for hot zone service, each heating module can be rolled away from the central transfer module to allow easy access to all hot zones in that module. This allows for easy-open access without the hindrance of confined spaces.

Distortion Evaluation

Figure 2. Differential gear used for distortion evaluation

Using a differential gear (Figure 2), we monitored two characteristics, which are usually requested for this type of gear, and tabulated the results. This evaluation was done using a current day load that will be illustrated as a large batch (FLEX) and those processed in the NANO will be a small batch (NANO). The two characteristics that have the most influence: (1) Cylindricity (circularity) of the outside diameter and the runout between the same diameter and (2) “Backface” flatness of the gear teeth.

Backface flatness (Figure 3) shows greater variance through the large batch with further distance from the nitrogen used in quenching in the range of 11.9 µm.  For the small batch results, the backface flatness distortion range was limited to only 1.2 µm. This uniform result is directly connected to the uniform quenching in the smaller load. This allows for parts to be processed closer to actual machined dimensions (near net shape), as well as being handled on an in-line production basis.

The runout analysis (Figure 4) shows a uniformity for the small batch with a spread of only 3.2 µm across the load. In the large batch, you will see a wider range of distortion uniformity using 10 bar nitrogen quenching with a spread of 24 µm. This is most likely due to the lower layers being further from the vertical down flow of gas through the load. These results are quite extraordinary for a full-size load.

Figure 4. Backface flatness comparing large batch processing (FLEX LOAD) and one-piece processing (NANO)

Conclusion

In-line processing can now be a common thought in the layout of future facilities. In practice, it is a growing aspect of the heat-treating world. With the new NANO vacuum furnace system and automation options, better part-to-part quality can be achieved along with better control of metallurgical parameters and results. Overall, streamlining heat treating into production cells throughout the facility allows for better part flow, and optimally sizing products for the production of particular throughput requirements.

References

[1] Beauchesne, D., “FNA2016 - LPC with OIL & GAS Quenching” (2016)

[2] Esteve, V. & Lelong, V., “LPC - What Does it Mean to Metallurgy” (ASM-Mexico 2016)

[3] Welch, A. & Lelong, V., “How it’s done and Why: Transitioning Parts from Atmosphere Carburizing to Low Pressure Vacuum Carburizing” (HT 2015)

 

About the author: Dennis Beauchesne is the general manager of ECM USA and brings experience of over 200 vacuum carburizing cells installed on high pressure gas quenching and oil quenching installations. He has worked in the thermal transfer equipment supply industry for almost 30 years, 18 of which have been with ECM USA.

Changing the In-Line Heat Treating Paradigm Read More »

China Exclusion Request Granted

Recently, the United States imposed a 25% tariff on thousands of products from China, but permitted U.S. companies to request an exclusion from paying tariffs. In this article, Omar Nashashibi, founding partner of  The Franklin Partnership, LLC, and a resource of Industrial Heating Equipment Association (IHEA), explains the latest news regarding the exclusion and its relevance to structural components for industrial furnaces.


Omar Nashashibi,
Founding Partner,
The Franklin Partnership, LLC

The United States Trade Representative (USTR) has extended an exclusion for importers from paying a 25% tariff on industrial furnace components from China. The exclusion to the China Section 301 tariffs for structural components for industrial furnaces was extended in the Federal Register notice published on July 9, 2020 (85 FR 41267). The exclusion to the 25% tariffs, originally granted in July 2019 and set to expire on June 9, 2020, is now extended through December 31, 2020. The extension of the exclusion to industrial furnace components is one of twelve announced by USTR. Nearly 100 other products, including furnace casings, will see their tariff exclusions expire.

In July 2018, the United States imposed 25% tariffs on $34 billion worth of products imported from China (List 1). Of importance to the industrial heating industry, included in List 1 were parts of industrial electric furnaces and ovens as well as industrial induction or dielectric heating equipment (HTS 8514.90.80).

With this extension, all products meeting the description of “structural components for industrial furnaces” and are classified under the HTS code 8514.90.8000, will continue to be excluded from the 25% tariff. To claim the extended exclusion, importers must report the regular HTS code for the product, as well as the exclusion HTS code: 9903.88.52.

(Photo source: Twitter)

China Exclusion Request Granted Read More »

The Heart of Heat Treat Today’s 40 Under 40

Heat Treat Today’s 40 Under 40 was created to bring recognition to young professionals in the industry, giving names, faces, and words to the rising generation of industry professionals. In this article, released in the final nomination period for Heat Treat Today’s 40 Under 40 Class of 2020, exemplary classmates from previous years share their views on the industry, giving words of encouragement to other young professionals, both current and future.


Kyle Hummel, P.E., Sr Metallurgical Engineer at Contour Hardening

In 2019, Kyle was nominated by Contour Hardening to receive the 40 Under 40 recognition. Since receiving the nomination, Kyle has begun an Executive MBA program at Purdue to, “expand my education in business and leadership,” Kyle wrote, “in order to improve my effectiveness in my current position as well as prepare myself for future roles.”

Over the years, Kyle has found the broad range of processes and technologies in the heat treat industry to be appealing. The heat treat industry, Kyle noted, “can offer the perfect balance of hands on work experience as well as quality and process improvement that can keep you engaged for years as you grow your career. Another advantage is that heat treaters typically supply a number of different industries, so you can get experience in multiple fields that will help steer your career choices.”

Read more about this 2019 Honoree here.

Matt Clinite, ICS Sales Manager at Ipsen USA

Similarly, Matt Clinite was recognized in last year’s 40 Under 40 Class of 2019. Over the past year, Matt has been leading his remote team of regional sales engineers, who help Ipsen’s customers secure aftermarket parts, retrofits, and field service technicians. For him, the switch to online platforms and less face-to-face contact in the era of COVID has brought him to consider the fact that the “forced adjustment” may have lasting effects on business in years to come. “For many of us extroverted professionals,” wrote Matt, “[it] is a real bummer, but I’m optimistic this will be a blip in time, and some day we will be able to continue meeting face to face.”

As a 31 years old young professional, a manager, and a father of two, Matt has critical insight into hiring and maintaining future young leaders: While many believe that the industry needs to attract young people, Matt flips the onus saying, “If you ask 10 successful people in the industry to tell you their story, 9 of them will say they fell into the industry by accident…the industry needs to retain the young people that ‘fall’ [in].” His suggestions are that employers take care of their young employees and “provide a career path that will allow them to grow financially and professionally.”

Read more about this 2019 honoree here.

A Few Words of Advice to Young Professionals

For young professionals beginning in this industry, both Kyle and Matt emphasize the importance of initiative and focused learning, especially on the job.

Kyle Hummel, Contour Hardening

  • “Learn as much as you can, and get out on the floor and understand the equipment and talk to the people who have been working in heat treat for years.” – Kyle Hummel
  • “Find someone who can be a mentor to you and help you through the learning curve – working with huge expensive furnaces and equipment can be intimidating at first, and having someone help guide you through the process will be very beneficial.” – Kyle Hummel
  • “Take it upon yourself to become known inside your organization. Find ways to get in front of senior leadership and the technical staff. Once they know who you are, find ways to continually insert yourself into projects and discussions with them.” – Matt Clinite
  • When invited to important meetings or discussions early on, “It’s ok (and often times
    best) to sit back and simply listen to the discussion. Take it all in and become a sponge.” – Matt Clinite
  • “Don’t be afraid to request meetings with leadership around topics such as: career advancement, merit increases or to voice your ideas.” – Matt Clinite

The Role of 40 Under 40

These two honorees, as well as fellow classmate Tim Mohr, Director of Strategic Programs at Paulo, and 2018 honoree, Danielle Cote at Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI), explained how the recognition has benefited them, and why they would encourage others to nominate their young colleagues this year or in future years.

Matt Clinite, Ipsen USA

Kyle Hummel: “Being a part of the 40 Under 40 class assists in making those connections to current or future customers, suppliers, or even competitors that you might not have made otherwise.  Heat treat is a close knit industry, and you never know when you will work with one of the other 40 under 40 winners, so it is nice to have that connection.”

Danielle Cote: Professor Cote indicated thankfulness of the honor to be a part of 40 Under 40 Class of  2018 as it provided recognition to an unrecognized field. Hear her full message at this link.

Matt Clinite: “It’s a fun thing to “tout” at the trade show and to post on LinkedIn. And of course to share the magazine with family and friends always makes for good dinner table talk. To me the best part is the comradery. I really enjoyed reaching out to (and having been reached out to) by other recipients… In 2019 I felt flattered when a well-recognized individual from the industry nominated me. I hope I can show other young professionals in the industry my appreciation by nominating them.”

 

Tim Mohr: Tim also recognized the networking value of his nomination. He says that his acceptance into the 40 Under 40 Class of 2019 allowed him to meet new people throughout the industry. Listen to his full testimonial below.

 

 

Read more: If you haven’t already, head over to Heat Treat Today’s 40 Under 40 to nominate a young professional in the industry.

 

(photo source: Hirvana Arvizu Soyhivan on www.unsplash.com)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Heart of Heat Treat Today’s 40 Under 40 Read More »

Reader Feedback: Thermocouples 101

Here is what readers are saying about recent posts on Heat Treat Today. Submit your comments to editor@heattreattoday.com.


On John Niggle and Ed Valykeo article, "Thermocouples 101" (click here to see original article)

John Niggle, Business Development Manager, Pelican Wire

Edward Valykeo, Thermocouple Specialist, Pelican Wire

In June 2020, Heat Treat Today published a noteworthy technical article on the basics of thermocouples by John Niggle, Business Development Manager, and Ed Valykeo, Thermocouple Specialist, at Pelican Wire, Naples, FL. The article covers the different types of thermocouples, questions to consider when deciding which type of thermocouple to use, as well as a fascinating discussion on thermocouple wire and wire insulations. One feature of significant recognition is the chart included by Niggle and Valykeo:

Thermocouple Color Code Chart (photo source: "Thermocouples 101")

 

One of Heat Treat Today's editorial contributors and readers, Martin Reeves of Unitherm Furnace, LLC, saw this article and provided valuable information to the subject:

Martin Reeves, Owner, Fontec-global, LLC

"Excellent article and a great base for understanding T/C's. Only one thing missing and that is the differences between US and international lead colours. These are very different and when equipment is sold overseas or imported this becomes important for T/C's to be wired correctly."

International Thermocouple Lead Colors (photo source: Martin Reeves)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


We welcome your inquiries to and feedback on Heat Treat Today articles. Submit your questions/comments to editor@heattreattoday.com.

Reader Feedback: Thermocouples 101 Read More »

Enhancing Fatigue Strength and Saving Money

Source: Advanced Nitriding Solutions Blog

While salt baths and gas nitriding are time-tested methods for hardening, what about the stringent body depth, surface hardness and composite layer thickness requirements for gears, guides, and drilling tools?

(photo source: https://ansion005.wordpress.com/)

In this Heat Treat Today Best of the Web feature, Advanced Nitriding Solutions shares the advantages of the surface hardening process of ion nitriding with plasma ions. While this surface hardening process is typically applied on steel, the process is both informative and relevant to other materials in the heat treating processes.

An excerpt: "...the fatigue strength is improved five to ten times from its typical “raw” life, depending on the material and the construction of the part. Thus the fatigue strength is improved without distortion compared to other surface treatment methods, thus saving customers money."

Read more: "The Advanced Nitriding Process – Enhance Fatigue Strength and Save Money"

 

(photo source: https://ansion005.wordpress.com/)


 

Enhancing Fatigue Strength and Saving Money Read More »

Demonstrating Oil Quenching Effectiveness

In this article by Lee Gearhart, Principal Engineer, Materials and Processes, Moog, Inc., and Chair, Aerospace Metals Engineering Committee, read about a “real time” heat treat inquiry regarding the interpretation of changed oil quenching effectiveness testing in AMS 2759, and Lee’s desire to ensure that the heat treater’s system maintains its effectiveness.

This article article first appeared in the latest edition (June 2020) of Heat Treat Today’s Automotive Heat Treat magazine.

* Please see the bottom of the article to view the AMS2759 sections to which Lee refers.


The Query:

Lee Gearhart, Principal Engineer, Materials and Processes, Moog, Inc., Chair, Aerospace Metals Engineering Committee

A gentleman, to whom I’ll refer as Mr. XXXX, sent the following query to SAE, the publisher of Aerospace Materials Specifications. The subject line was as follows: “Clarification of AMS 2759G for Committee ‘E’.”

The letter read:

I would like to get some clarification about AMS 2759, Revision G, paragraphs 3.10.3 through 3.10.3.1.5.5. My issue, as an independent testing lab, is the terminology used in 3.10.3.1.5.1 and 3.10.3.1.5.3., and how

I am to determine the acceptance criteria for the hardness in the center diameter of the quench effectiveness samples supplied to us by heat treating companies. Let me walk through the steps that lead up to the determination of minimum hardness at the center of the diameter of the coupon prepared.

Paragraph 3.10.3.1.2 states specific size test bars to use for the quench effectiveness testing, based on the alloy, in sub-paragraphs a., b., c., and d. For 4130 (a.), use 1.5” long, 0.50” diameter bar and for 4330V (c.), use 7.5” long, 2.5” diameter bar. Then, we cut the test coupon from this specimen todetermine hardness at the center diameter, per 10.3.1.4.

Next, we have to determine whether this hardness result, taken at the center diameter, conforms to the spec, and here is where my issue is. Paragraphs 10.3.1.5.1 and 10.3.1.5.3 both state, “…shall not be less than the hardness on the end-quench hardenability curve corresponding to the diameter of the specimen…” So, if I am to use the diameter of the specimen as my guide from paragraph 3.10.3.1.2, a.and c., then the end-quench result on the mill cert corresponding to 8/16 would represent the 0.50”diameter, and 40/16 would represent the 2.5” diameter. ASTM A255 has you stop taking readings on the Jominy bar at 32/16 (2.0”), so there would not be a result on the Mill Cert for the 40/16 requirement.

I don’t believe this is the correct depth. I believe the end-quench result corresponding to one-half the diameter would be the appropriate depth to use as a minimum requirement, since we are taking the hardness reading at one-half the diameter; in the center of the diameter. So, the end-quench result on the mill cert corresponding to 4/16 would represent the 0.50” diameter and 20/16 would represent the 2.5” diameter bar. These requirements are more stringent and would better represent the effectiveness of the quench media to properly quench the specimens and correlate this back to the certified values of the material based on the mill cert reading for the corresponding J values.

Please review this and consult with the Committee to see if this would better represent the intent of these paragraphs for acceptance of quench effectiveness.

The Response:

Because of my position as chairperson of the Aerospace Metals Engineering Committee, the question eventually made its way to my desk. Here is my response:

When reading your question, it suddenly struck me – you’re missing the secret decoder ring! In other words, you cannot directly compare an oil quenched sample to a water quenched (Jominy) test coupon.

Allow me to give you a long-winded explanation that I wrote for Committee E on Steel for the Aerospace Materials Division, the committee that has jurisdiction of AMS2759 on Heat Treating of Steel. The committee had been asked for an explanation of what the 3.10.3 Quench System Monitoring is supposed to do; after the text in italics, I’ll directly answer you.

Let me start by noting the whole purpose of 3.10.3.1, which was to provide a means for a heat treater to demonstrate that their oil quenching system continues to work well. If they do the steps outlined in 3.10.3.1, they do not need to seek approval from their customers for this method. If they choose a different method for monitoring the quench system, they need approval by the cognizant engineering organization (CEO). Since a heat treat firm will probably have many customers with different CEO’s, it makes sense to have one test procedure on which all can agree.

The method starts with the heat treat quality function choosing one of the suggested alloys and bar size configurations noted in 3.10.3.1.2. The constraints of the choice are that the hardenability of the sample has to be enough that they will get full hardening in the center, but not so much that a bar 1.25 times the diameter chosen would get full hardening. (That prevents me from using an air hardening steel, which will not show any difference when my quench system degrades.) If the three choices in 3.10.3.1.2 (a-c) will not work, then (d) offers an out, using other materials and dimensions, established in pre-production testing.

Prior to initial production, and quarterly afterward, the heat treater runs one of the test bars in a typical or simulated production load. They then section out a half-inch slice from the middle of the length of the bar and test the hardness. If in the quarterly testing it remains above the acceptance criterion established by the pre-production testing, their quench system passes.

Figure 1. Cert 4130

Accept/reject criteria is that the hardness in the center meets the hardness of the end-quench hardenability curve done by the original mill, or someone else, per ASTM A255, on the material used for the test. AMEC wanted this because using the generic curves in ASTM A304 is too general, and the curves are routinely done by the steel mills. I’ve attached an example cert (Figure 1) for some 4130 we bought not long ago, and at the bottom of the page are the Jominy numbers! They range from 51 to 24; so, which should I use?

To find the correct accept/reject hardness, I go to a curve that shows what Jominy distance in sixteenths of an inch reflects the cooling at the center of the size of test bar I use. If I’m using 4130 steel from my certified lot of material, the specimen is half inch in diameter, and the attached Timken curves say that the center of a half inch bar cooled with an H of 5 (good agitation) corresponds to a Jominy distance of 3/16, so the hardness required is 49 HRC. If I use a different curve, like the other one attached from an old Copperweld brochure (Figure 2), I get a Jominy distance of 31⁄2, so my acceptance number is somewhere between 49 and 46, so I’ll use 48 HRC. This difference is small, and unimportant, since I’m only using it to show if there is degradation in the oil quench performance.

Figure 2. Jominy Cooling Rates (Copperweld Steel Brochure)

This “compare it with the Jominy curve done by the mill” is only for the 4130 and 4330V specimens noted in 3.10.3.1.5.1 and 3.10.3.1.5.3. For specimens made of 4140, we call out HRC 44 in the center and HRC 50 in the 3⁄4 radius position of the 11⁄2 inch diameter specimen.

So, the 8/16 position on the Jominy curve doesn’t mean it’s appropriate for a half inch diameter specimen – it’s just pointing to the spot on the Jominy bar that’s 8/16 inch from the end that gets sprayed with water. The “secret decoder ring” I mentioned are the “Jominy cooling rates” or the “Pages from Timkin” attachment (Figures 3). These translate the speed of quenching at any sixteenth- inch position of a Jominy bar to the equivalent rate of quenching of surface, mid-radius, and center of bars of different size quenched in various coolants. I tend to use the “Jominy cooling rates” attachment, which I got from an old Copperweld Steel brochure, but since the Timkin Practical Data Handbook for Metallurgists is on the web for free, it’s probably a more universal reference.

Hence for 0.50” diameter 4130 bar, the center hardness should be that corresponding to between 3 and 4 sixteenths of an inch. For the 2.5” diameter bar, quenched in mildly agitated oil, the cooling rate at the center would be represented by the 14/16” position on the Jominy bar. Maybe 15/16” – it’s kind of hard to read. Hence you read the data from the mill cert FOR THE STEEL FROM WHICH THE PIECES WERE MADE and use those numbers as accept/reject. HTT

About the author: Lee Gearhart, P.E., has worked for Moog, Inc. since 1982 and is currently Principal Engineer, Materials and Process Engineering.  In addition to being a worldwide resource for the company, Lee is the current chair of the Aerospace Metals Engineering Committee, where much of the discussion on heat treating specifications occurs. 

 For more information, contact Lee at lgearhart@moog.com or 716-687-4475 


*Section 3.10.3 from AMS2759 Heat Treatment of Steel Parts (This section is one of the big changes to AMS2759 revision F, April 2018, which was then tweaked to revision G in August 2019) 

 The sections to which the article discusses is 3.10.3.1, 3.10.3.1.2 (a-d)3.10.3.1.5.1 and 3.10.3.1.5.3 

 3.10.3 Quench System Monitoring 

The quench system includes the quench volume, type of fluid, recirculation velocity and uniformity, and heat exchange capacity. The consistency of the quench system shall be monitored quarterly, by processing test parts, as outlined below, which are capable of detecting changes in the cooling characteristics of the system. Testing of water quench systems is not required. Quench system monitoring test procedures other than those described in 3.10.3.1 shall be approved by the cognizant engineering authority. When destructive mechanical property testing is required for part acceptance, quench system monitoring is not required.  

3.10.3.1 Test Specimen Requirements  

3.10.3.1.1 Test Specimen Alloy/Configuration  

3.10.3.1.1.1 Round specimens of carbon or low alloy steel, of appropriate hardenability and dimensions shall be used. Selection of the specimen dimensions/hardenability combination shall be aimed at achieving full hardening (e.g., 95% martensite) at the center of the specimen. The specific combination of alloy/dimensions chosen shall be such that the specimen would not be capable of achieving full hardening at 1.25 times the diameter chosen for the test specimen. The length of the test specimen shall be at least three times the diameter.  

3.10.3.1.1.2 The test specimens used for the initial and subsequent evaluation of a particular quenchant shall be from the same alloy and preferably the same chemistry heat of material to eliminate material chemistry and hardenability differences from the alloy selection. Hardenability results shall not be lower than that represented by requirements in 3.10.3.1.5.  

3.10.3.1.2 Test specimen alloy/dimensions shall be one of the following:  

  1. 4130 round bar, minimum 1.50 inches (3.81 cm) long, 0.50 inch (1.27 cm) nominal diameter
  2. 4140 round bar, minimum 4.50 inches (11.43 cm) long, 1.50 inches (381 cm) nominal diameter. 
  3. 4330V round bar, minimum 7.50 inches (19.05 cm) long, 2.5 inches (6.35 cm) nominal diameter. 
  4. Other material and dimensional requirements established in pre-production testing or as specified by the cognizant engineering organization. See 8.5 for shape equivalent guidelines. 

3.10.3.1.3 Test Specimen Processing  

Quarterly quench system monitoring tests shall be run with a typical or simulated production load. Heat treat loads shall be processed in accordance with the appropriate AMS2759 slash specification requirements.  

3.10.3.1.4 Specimen Testing Requirements  

After quenching the test specimen, a 0.5-inch-thick specimen shall be cut from the center of the test specimen length and prepared for hardness testing in the untempered condition. Specimen shall be prepared to ensure it is free from overheating. The minimum hardness at the center of the diameter shall meet the hardness requirements of the approved procedure in 3.10.3.  

3.10.3.1.5 Test Specimen Hardenability  

3.10.3.1.5.1 Round Bar Specimen 4130  

After quenching, the center of the diameter shall not be less than the hardness on the end-quench hardenability curve corresponding to the diameter of the specimen when tested in accordance with ASTM E18. The end-quench hardenability curve shall be the actual hardenability curve determined in accordance with ASTM A255 on the material used for the test specimen.  

3.10.3.1.5.2 Round Bar Specimen 4140  

The hardness in the center of the diameter shall not be less than HRC 44 and the 3/4 radius shall not be less than HRC 50 when tested in accordance with ASTM E18.  

3.10.3.1.5.3 Round Bar Specimen 4330V  

The hardness in the center of the diameter shall not be less than the hardness on the end-quench hardenability curve corresponding to the diameter of the specimen when tested in accordance with ASTM E18. The end-quench hardenability curve shall be the actual hardenability curve determined in accordance with ASTM A255 on the material used for the test specimen.  

3.10.3.1.5.4 If other combinations are established, the accept/reject criteria shall be as specified in the ordering information.  

3.10.3.1.5.5 It is the responsibility of the heat treater to provide the material and hardenability data specified above.  

3.10.3.2 Any failures shall be documented by the heat treater’s corrective action system.  

3.10.3.2.1 As a minimum, if the test specified in 3.10.3 fails, the quench medium shall be analyzed as specified in 3.10.3.3.  

3.10.3.3 Quench Media Control  

3.10.3.3.1 Each new shipment of quenchant from a vendor shall meet the requirements for the particular quenchant listed in 3.10.3.3.1.1 through 3.10.3.3.1.3 as applicable. The vendor shall furnish a certificate of conformance stating that the quenchant meets the requirements including, in addition to the vendor designation, the cooling curve, the cooling rate curve, the maximum cooling rate, and:  

3.10.3.3.1.1 For mineral oil based quenchants, the certificate shall also include the viscosity, flash point, temperature at the maximum cooling rate.  

3.10.3.3.1.2 For vegetable or ester-based oil quenchants, the certificate shall also include the viscosity, flash point, temperature at the maximum cooling rate.  

3.10.3.3.1.3 For polymer quenchants, the certificate shall also include the undiluted pH and viscosity. The pH, viscosity, maximum cooling rate and the temperature at the maximum cooling rate shall be provided at 20% concentration by weight.  

3.10.3.3.2 Cooling curve tests shall be performed semi-annually, or when required by corrective action (3.10.3.2), in accordance with ASTM D6200, ISO 9950 or JIS K 2242, ASTM D6482, or ASTM D6549, as applicable to the specific quench medium. If no alternative limits have been established by pre-production tests or specified by the cognizant engineering authority, exceeding the following limits compared to the initial shipment of quenchant shall be cause for corrective action:  

  • For mineral oils: Temperature of the Maximum Cooling Rate: (±68 °F) (37.8 °C) Maximum Cooling Rate: (±25 °F/s) (13.9 °C/s) 
  • For vegetable or ester-based oils: Maximum Cooling Rate: (±25 °F/s) (13.9 °C/s) Temperature of the Maximum Cooling Rate: (±68 °F) (37.8 °C) 
  • For polymer quenchants: Maximum Cooling Rate: ±15% Temperature of the Maximum Cooling Rate: ±15% 

(Photo source: global.ihs.com)

 

Demonstrating Oil Quenching Effectiveness Read More »

IoT Technology Implemented for Enhanced Furnace Performance

Wisconsin Oven Corporation announced a new IoT (Internet of things) predictive maintenance technology available on their industrial ovens. The new system is capable of monitoring the performance and health of components on the ovens. Some of the conditions that the sensors track are vibration, temperature, current, and pressure.

Wisconsin DataSense Technologies (photo source: Wisconsin Oven YouTube video)

The system will be supplied by DataSense Technologies. Their Performance Monitoring System utilizes sensors to monitor the condition of components on a customer’s industrial oven, featuring a gateway that collects performance data from sensors on critical oven components.

This system will enable customers to minimize unscheduled downtime and increase their profitability because the Performance Monitoring system can be used to identify performance and component issues. Automatic alarm thresholds can be implemented to satisfy the specific needs of heat treating customers.

Learn more about the DataSense Technologies with a video here.

(photo source: www.wisoven.com)

Wisconsin DataSense Technologies (photo source: Wisconsin Oven YouTube video)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IoT Technology Implemented for Enhanced Furnace Performance Read More »

14 Quick Heat Treat News Chatter Items to Keep You Current

Heat Treat Today offers News Chatter, a feature highlighting representative moves, transactions, and kudos from around the industry.

Personnel Chatter

  • Al Behr has been promoted to be Executive Vice President at Nucor Corp. as Ladd Hall retires.
  • Christian Schrade assumed the responsibilities of former Managing Director of Tenova LOI Thermprocess GmbH as Erik Míček retired from the company.
  • Janet Nanni, PHR, SHRM-CP, was recently announced the new Director of Human Resources at Ipsen, after the May 6 retirement of longtime Ipsen HR Director Nancy Kolar.
  • Joe Conyers joins the sales team at Graphite Metallizing Corp.
  • Lilia Jasso is announced the new President of the ASM Mexico Chapter.
  • Michael D'Ambrose is named Executive Vice President of Human Resources at Boeing, succeeding Wendy Livingston, effective July 6, 2020.
  • Solar Atmospheres of Western PA (SAWPA) announced the addition of Melissa Gruszka to our team as Quality Manager.

    Al Behr, Executive Vice President, Nucor Corp.

    Christian Schrade, Managing Director, with Torsten Koepchen, CFO, of Tenova LOI Thermprocess

    Janet Nanni, Director of Human Resources, Ipsen

Joe Conyers, sales, Graphite Metallizing Corp.

Lilia Jasso, President, ASM Mexico Chapter

Michael D'Ambrose, Executive Vice President of Human Resources, Boeing

Melissa Gruszka, Quality Manager, Solar Manufacturing

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


  • Aerospace Testing & Pyrometry (ATP) is acquiring the assets and clients of AKA Calibrations starting June of 2020.
  • McLaughlin Furnace Group is continuing to build their new building, upgrading both for doubled capacity and product expansion.
  • MetalPro Resources, consisting of Jim Senne, Steve Maus and Bill Andreski, will assume the role of Sales Representative for the states of Ohio, Indiana and Kentucky on behalf of Solar Manufacturing.
  • Thermal Vac in California is building up its new location in Arizona, USA.

Jim Senne, Steve Maus and Bill Andreski at MetalPro

  • Bombardier officially closed the sale of the CRJ program to Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd (“MHI”). This marks a turning point for Bombardier as it completes their exit from the Commercial Aviation market.
  • Magnetic Specialties (MSI) announced the launch of their redesigned website, www.magspecinc.com.

MSI launches updated website

Special Mention

On Tuesday, April 28th, 2020, Thermcraft Inc. lost its president and CEO, Mr. Thomas Morris Crafton, at 67. Tom was a dedicated and diligent leader and friend in his personal life and to those in the company.

In 1978, Tom and his wife, Nancy, moved to Winston-Salem where he joined his parents, Mr. Morris L. Crafton and his wife, Clara, at Thermcraft, founded by the couple in 1971. Tom was a successful businessman and was greatly admired by his colleagues, continually developing lasting bonds with those around him.

Tom became President & CEO of Thermcraft, Inc. and expanded the company internationally. In his time at Thermcraft, he has given presentations about small businesses in Washington DC and has relationships with companies throughout the US, Europe and Asia.

He created meaningful connections with customers and his employees, having both a witty sense of humor and always being quick with a comeback. During his daily presence at Thermcraft, Tom mentored, counseled and advised his employees, many of whom he considered his friends. He will be missed by everyone who knew him.

Heat Treat Today offers its condolences to the family of Mr. Thomas M. Crafton and the team at Thermcraft Inc.


Heat Treat Today is pleased to join in the announcements of growth and achievement throughout the industry by highlighting them here on our News Chatter page. Please send any information you feel may be of interest to manufacturers with in-house heat treat departments especially in the aerospace, automotive, medical, and energy sectors to editor@heattreattoday.com

14 Quick Heat Treat News Chatter Items to Keep You Current Read More »

Heat Treat History Offers Promise to the Present

In today’s article, Heat Treat Todays editorial staff has gathered noteworthy reflections of heat treaters who are looking to the past to offer hope to present circumstances. Read more to see that while the present seems paused with Covid-19, the past offers promise of growth and change through challenges.


Like many markets, the heat treating industry is seeking to make the best out of this summer of 2020, and even though the market is looking more positive by the day, there are many who still look for a sense of normalcy. However, with leaders looking at historical moments in heat treat, they remind us that while the present seems paused with Covid-19, the past offers promise of growth and change through the challenges of life.

Sceenshot of Bodycote’s “An Interactive History of Metallurgy” (photo source: https://www.bodycote.com/history-of-metal/)

A major reach into the past is a throwback to the 90th century BC called “An Interactive History of Metallurgy.” In this historical timeline, Bodycote presents an engaging look at copper, bronze, iron, and tin through the centuries. The developments include detailed information, mostly funneled from Wikipedia, like the fact that bronze alloy in 12th century English candlesticks contained a degree of silver, antimony, and arsenic. And the modern, continuous development of steel is believed to have begun in the carbon furnaces of Sub-Saharan African communities.

(photo source: SECO/WARWICK)

On June 30, 2020, SECO/WARWICK released an “anniversary reflection” to commemorate the achievements of the Group in the first half of 2020. Among these is the 10th anniversary of their Chinese branch which has now become a recognized leader of CAB systems in heat treat, creating furnaces for aluminum brazing in controlled atmospheres. They conclude their message with a word from Sławomir Woźniak, President of the Management Board, saying, “We wish that health, patience and faith – embracing the world at large – will return to normal.”

Sanderson’s Weir (photo source: Shane Higgins on LinkedIn)

Finally, a recent LinkedIn post from Shane HigginsField Sales from Special Quality Alloys Ltd, shared a lunch-time crowd favorite: Sanderson’s Weir, built in the 1580s. With two iron forges on either side of the River Don in Sheffield, this low dam was built to provide power to the industrial work. Changes in the nature of industry has allowed a 20-year project along the River Don in Sheffield and Rotherham to permit a fish pass for salmon after 200 years without. It is impressive that the location that once produced iron still houses metalworking business.

 

 

 

(photo source: Hakon Sataoen on unsplash.com)

(photo source: https://www.bodycote.com/history-of-metal/)

 

 

 

 

 

 


Heat Treat History Offers Promise to the Present Read More »

IHEA Monthly Economic Report: Don’t Be Faint of Heart; Rebound Coming

The  latest Industrial Heating Equipment Association’s (IHEA) Executive Economic Summary begins, “The lockdown recession has been with us for over three months now, and there are few that have not experienced the impact.” How true are those words. But, be encouraged, “By most accounts this will be the bottom, and future reports will start to show slow improvement . . . there have been consistent assertions that economic growth will rebound by the third and fourth quarter.” Some may doubt the optimism, however, “there are some indications that such a forecast may be realistic.”

The indices share a consistent theme in that all show a decline “that are nearly a straight line down.” Yet, there is one notable exception: the data for the Credit Managers’ Index reveals the same severe decline, but with an upward trend at the end. The summary explains, “The index is divided into favorable and unfavorable categories from the perspective of a credit manager. The favorables include categories such as ‘sales,’ ‘applications for credit,’ ‘dollar collections’ and ‘amount of credit extended’. The unfavorables include ‘rejections of credit applications,’ ‘accounts out for collection,’ ‘disputes,’ ‘slow pays’ and ‘bankruptcies’.”

The decline that was evident in March and April was due “almost entirely to the collapse in the favorable data.” But in May, they improved substantially. Interestingly and optimistically, “Credit managers tend to think in the future as they are most concerned with what shape a debtor will be in when they are due to pay. If a company has 90 or 120 or 180 days to pay the credit manager is not going to worry about them until that time. The fact that they are getting a bit more confident now indicates that they are starting to see some positive developments down the road and not all that far away.”

The upward trend in the Credit Movement shows positive progression down the road in the not too distant future.

The other indices share a woeful tale with record setting declines. The report explains, “There is no mystery at all as to why this is the case as the lockdown was universal and sudden. There was no time at all for business or the consumer to prepare, and there have been very few options available since the declaration.” However, the U.S. Labor Department released the latest job numbers and there were expectations that the unemployment number would hit 20%, but in reality the number was 13.4%.

So, where does the economy go from here? The summary cites three factors that will come into play: First, the attitude of the consumer — “If there is to be a real rebound the consumer will have to want to resume their old behaviors and soon.” Second, the action of the government — “[This] has varied from state to state. Some have been eager to reopen and others have put off this resumption until into 2021.” Third, the course of the viral infection — this will drive the first two factors.

Buckle up, folks, the wild adventure continues!

The report is available to IHEA member companies. For membership information, and a full copy of  the 12-page report, contact Anne Goyer, Executive Director of the Industrial Heating Equipment Association (IHEA). Email Anne by clicking here.

Anne Goyer, Executive Director of IHEA
Anne Goyer, Executive Director of IHEA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IHEA Monthly Economic Report: Don’t Be Faint of Heart; Rebound Coming Read More »