MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT TECH

Heat Treat Radio #135: Modernizing Heat Treat with a Unified Process Platform


Heat Treat Radio host, Doug Glenn, sits down with Peter Sherwin, director of Strategic Marketing at Watlow, to discuss how the next generation of process control technology is being shaped by the evolving needs of the heat treating industry. Their conversation explores the role of AI, cybersecurity, workforce development, energy efficiency, and compliance in modern furnace operations, as well as how Watlow’s Edge Process Management (EPM) platform aims to bring these capabilities together in a unified system. Looking beyond a single product launch, the episode examines the trends that could define heat treating over the next two decades.

Below, you can watch the video, listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or read an edited transcript.




The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.

Introduction (1:04)

Doug Glenn: Welcome to another episode of Heat Treat Radio. I have the pleasure of actually being face-to-face here with our guest today, Peter Sherwin. Peter is the director of strategic marketing at Watlow, and we’re going to be discussing an exciting product that Watlow recently launched.

Host of Heat Treat Radio Doug Glenn (left) and Director of Strategic Marketing at Watlow Peter Sherwin (right)

There’s been some discussion in the industry about Watlow’s commitment to the thermal processing market. Can you address that?

Peter Sherwin: One of Watlow’s taglines is “wherever thermal is critical.” Obviously, thermal is very critical in heat treatment. My background is from Eurotherm, now combined with Watlow. I’ve been with the organization for around 17 years now. There was always a bias toward heat treatment within Eurotherm, but Watlow has a much broader portfolio.

Heat treatment is still very important to Watlow, but we play in a number of different spaces. The business is split into two key verticals: semiconductor and industrials. The heat treatment activity resides under the industrials banner, whether it’s automotive, aerospace, etc. So, it’s still very key to us, and I think we’ve been pushing more through our distribution channel as of late, particularly in the last twelve months.

We have been working on training and re-skilling our workforce, as well as developing the next generation of products. That’s been taking quite a bit of our focus, but we definitely have not stepped away from heat treatment.

Doug Glenn: Watlow has been dedicated to providing the resources to do that. You have been with the company when Eurotherm was standalone, when Eurotherm was Schneider, and now as Eurotherm is Watlow. Comparatively speaking, are you happy with the resources that Watlow has dedicated to the brand?

Peter Sherwin: Originally, Eurotherm was part of the Invensys setup.

Doug Glenn: Correct; I forgot that. 

Peter Sherwin: But it was pretty much a standalone company. We used some of the Invensys products, like Wonderware, etc. As time went on, we were acquired by Schneider around 2014. We were folded into the energy controls business as a whole but still remained intact with Eurotherm. We had our own offices and sales team spread globally around the world. But you could tell toward the end, when Eurotherm put us up for sale and Watlow acquired us, there was a little bit of restriction in spending at that time, which probably slowed down some of the velocity of that program. Thankfully, since Watlow picked us up, we’ve gone full steam ahead. A lot of investment — I’m surprised by the amount of investment.

I’ve been in the industry for 30+ years, and it’s given me the opportunity to work across the world. I started in Europe running commercial heat treatment plants, as well as captive. Then I moved to India working with a suite of commercial shops. Then, about 18 years ago, I moved to the U.S., and it’s all on the back of heat treatment. It’s amazing to look back on. It’s a fascinating industry, and I feel as though I still owe something to the industry. This next generation of platform, for me, is something I’ve worked on for 10 years.

The Edge Process Management (EPM) Platform (6:38)

Doug Glenn: Let’s talk about that. We both attended an industry event where they said the next 4 years will determine the next 20. Essentially, this next period of time is going to be pretty critical. This product you mentioned, EPM, which stands for Edge Process Management, correct?

Peter Sherwin: Correct. 

Doug Glenn: Can you describe what it is? 

Peter Sherwin: EPM is a platform product. Eurotherm was started in 1965 and produced a lot of instrumentation for the heat treat industry. Everything was kind of separated. We had the best in temperature control, the best in chart recorders, originally from a brand called Chessell, and also the best in SCR power controllers. That was perfectly good for the time those came out.

But as we’re moving into this newer arena, there needs to be far more connection between those devices to address some of the challenges the heat treat industry has to wrap its arms around. For example, how do we improve compliance and make it far easier? What about energy efficiency? That 4 years will dictate the next 20 years to 2050. Think about how the planet will be at that point in time. We will need to run our furnaces far more efficiently.

Doug Glenn: I think more than any other time in history, nobody knows what the industry is going to look like 20 to 30 years down the road. It used to be that you could make a decent prediction. I’m not sure we can do that anymore.

EPM is a platform, not a discrete instrument or product, correct?  

Peter Sherwin: The four years are key because of how we are rolling it out. We are releasing one part after another, so it will take a bit of time for the full platform to emerge. We start the release in July with data management, which really replaces our historical chart recorder but goes much further than that. And then, as that evolves, we will bring out control, data, and full automation over the next few years. That’s why it’s a platform. It all shares the same IO base and has the same programming software. There’s commonality across everything, but effectively you can put any of these modules anywhere that makes sense.  

Doug Glenn: What is the motivating force behind the development of the platform? I’m assuming that your company, and perhaps companies even before that, had concepts of changes that would occur over the next so many years. Were some of those developments the impetus behind creating this platform? For example, workforce changes — did they have an impact on the motivation to get this platform up and running?

Peter Sherwin: I think we benefited from some of the slowing-down process of Schneider because we were able to make some architectural choices that fit with this kind of new world of AI. A lot of the web technology we’re using fits very well with AI, so we are fortunate that we can leverage some of the current technologies. As we sit here today, AI is in the news all the time. Not everyone is completely sure how all of that is going to unfold but producing a platform today and not being able to utilize AI would be a big miss. So, we integrated those features within the platform, which helps us address many of these workforce challenges.

Considerations When Building This Platform (11:35)

Doug Glenn: Those were actually two of the areas I wanted to ask you about: the workforce and AI. Some other areas I was thinking about were electrification, energy, compliance, and cybersecurity. I assume these were all considerations when you were putting together this platform.

Peter Sherwin: These areas of concern have just accelerated the need for deeply embedding all those technology features. I’m not sure we fully understand how the workforce changes are going to affect the industry and specifically in a furnace operation, but there’s definitely going to be a component of AI that is needed. As we have so many people retiring, there are people coming into the industry who have no background in processes like signing off on records and certain procedures. We have to get new hires up to speed very quickly.

This is the type of technology we’re putting into the EPM platform, to enable people to have a very short learning curve, be useful very quickly, and arm them with the likes of AI so they can enhance their capabilities.

Three forces reshaping heat treatment: an aging workforce, rising energy demands, and the rapid arrival of AI.

Energy is another one of these points. If you have separate components, it takes quite a lot to then integrate those components together to make them more useful, like a temperature controller and a power controller. You can do it, but it doesn’t have all the abilities of one device. You’re only passing certain information between the two. But if you can make that power controller have all the capabilities of control and data, you can more easily manage energy efficiency going forward. This energy piece is another trend this new platform will address.

Doug Glenn: How about the cybersecurity and compliance issues you were talking about?

Related Reading: CMMC Phase II just hit pause. As Sherwin notes in this interview, cybersecurity requirements are only rising for heat treaters — this piece breaks down what the pause does (and doesn’t) mean for defense-supply-chain compliance.

Peter Sherwin: I think that’s one major benefit of a new platform. Cybersecurity requirements have been around for a while. A few years ago, we had SB-327, a California law that came out because of hacking concerns with baby monitors. This law affected everything, though. If an industrial supplier had an internet-connected device, they had to ensure more protection on those devices. You wouldn’t believe the hurdles to then re-engineer cybersecurity into older products — not easy and kind of clunky. Our clients probably still want to slap our wrists on that, because it’s not easy for them. We had to do it because it was a law in California and CMMC. There are laws just coming into effect toward the end of next year in Europe. All of these are going to push higher and higher requirements for cybersecurity. The benefit of a new platform is that you can design these cybersecurity requirements from the start. We’re fortunate there, but it’s a big deal.

Impact of Aging Infrastructure (15:26)

Doug Glenn: How about the fact that the infrastructure most of the systems are built on now is aging out. You’re fortunate to be able to almost start from scratch. Can you comment on the aging infrastructure?

Peter Sherwin: I was having a discussion with a large global heat treater a couple of weeks ago, and they were talking about how one of their issues is that every furnace is different. With this new platform, we are looking to solve those challenges and requirements for clients. We also realize some clients want something they can just take out and put in place, a discrete instrument. So, along with EPM, we’re building what we call our level three controller. That’s a project in flight at the moment. We’ll preview it at Furnaces North America, and it’ll be released sometime in 2027.

The NanoDac recorder | Image Credit: Watlow

If you look at all the different products now across Watlow and Eurotherm, discrete products like the F40, the NanoDac, 2704, 2604, 3504 — these devices are very different, and it’s a learning curve for someone to learn and program them. We are taking the best of these devices and putting them into a new device. Even if you just want to replace a single device, we’ll have that next year.

We are trying to account for the fact that if you’ve got an operator who’s been running a particular controller for several years, how can we make that display appear the same to them? I’m hoping we’ll have some prototypes at the show so we can demonstrate. It’s kind of exciting as we come to the end of a whole suite of products from the Eurotherm and Watlow portfolio and what we’re moving into next. Not just the platform but also being able to keep some of those instruments going with a slightly new disguise.

Doug Glenn: Right, that fits into this platform. Sounds very interesting.  

EPM Platform Benefits for Users (18:00)

Doug Glenn: You have talked about the clients and the users of these devices and technologies. If you can summarize briefly, why do they need this platform?

Peter Sherwin: It’s about what you were saying earlier — the next 4 years dictate the next 20. There are so many challenges for heat treaters: dealing with a lack of personnel, new hires not having the skill base, and trying to train faster. These issues are going to hit everyone.

We are not going to see a slowdown in energy initiatives, though possibly a pause in some places in the world at the moment. Why wouldn’t you want to be more energy efficient? We’ve been developing some algorithms for this new platform to enable energy efficiency. It’s not just about climate — it’s about running your operations more efficiently. The two concepts we mentioned earlier: cybersecurity, which is going to rise, and AI. How are our clients or prospective clients going to be able to leverage AI for their operations?

I don’t think that exists in today’s technology, but we’re building it. I’ve seen some of these prototypes where, instead of having to drag function blocks onto an engineering diagram and manually software-wire, it’s just a prompt. Say what you want, and it will create that architecture. It blows my mind when you see it. It’s not a big leap from what’s available to us at our fingertips today, if you use ChatGPT, Claude, etc. But it’s bringing that technology into our industry.

Building the EPM Platform (21:24)

Doug Glenn: We’ve talked a bit about what EPM is. I’m curious about what it took for Watlow to build it. It seems daunting. Can you discuss that process in terms of scalability, data integrity, etc.

Peter Sherwin: Like anything, it takes a village — a global village. We started in 2016. We had a team in India that put together a questionnaire and went around the world to key clients asking in-depth questions.

Doug Glenn: Getting the voice of the client. 

Peter Shirwin: We wanted to learn what was needed for a next-generation product. Now, as we’ve mentioned, things slowed down a bit with the handover at the end of Schneider and into Watlow. Since then, it’s been full speed ahead with Watlow.  

Watlow also bought control capabilities; they had their own control line. They manufacture their products in Winona. So now we’ve introduced a Winona team into this village. The original creators were based in Worthing. These were the designers and were responsible for product/project management. We have initial manufacturing where all the Eurotherm instruments are manufactured in Poland, and we also have engineering resources in India. You can imagine all of these groups collaborating. It’s a 24-hour cycle just to build this platform. For anyone looking to build something similar, do not underestimate the amount of effort and money it takes to create something like this. It’s a commitment.  

You asked about our commitment to heat treatment. This platform alone is a big commitment, because of the increased ability to do TUSs, SATs, along with process control and process recorders.

Doug Glenn: I did want to ask you about that.

Peter Sherwin: All of that has been considered in this platform. It doesn’t just apply to heat treatment, because from the Eurotherm side, historically, there were two main industries we focused on: heat treatment and life sciences. Life science is all the requirements for auditing. If you make one single change on a device, you have to make sure it was the right person that made that change and have full records. So we really just expanded on all of that intelligence that we already had to a point in some of our data management products. Where heat treatment is kind of moving, life science has already been somewhat out in front. All of that functionality supports the direction we feel heat treatment will potentially go.

Doug Glenn: It seems like a very daunting task to put something like this together.

Peter Sherwin: Daunting but exciting, and you always want to release things as soon as possible. There’s a lot of work in testing the platform. We have a brand to uphold, and we need to make sure we get something out there that works consistently. You know what the heat treatment game is like, Nadcap requirements, AMS2750 — it has to be right.

Compliance for Both Captive and Commercial Heat Treaters (25:46)

Doug Glenn: You mentioned compliance, AMS2750, and Nadcap. How will this EPM platform help a captive heat treater, as well as a commercial one?

Peter Sherwin: For us, it doesn’t really matter. It’s a furnace, and it’s about how best to control that furnace. It starts with the analog input card. You have to get that right for everything else to follow. Much of the development was around how we make a card that meets the requirements of not just a process controller, but also a field test instrument. How can we get that accuracy level in that card so it can be used across anything and isn’t restricted? And, obviously, we need to do it in a cost-effective manner so a commercial or captive heat treater can actually afford it.

We had an R&D project that looked at various ways of doing this. The analysis concluded that errors with the cold junction compensation (CJC) had the biggest impact on accuracy, so we developed a method of CJC. Essentially, it’s like having a very accurate sensor at every junction. That’s what we have on our IO cards. It’s patented, so anyone can go out and look at the details of the patent. Ultimately, it meets process control requirements and field test requirements, which then means you have the possibility, per furnace, to do process control, SAT, and TUS on the same platform. There are some restrictions on Nadcap. You have to mark that this module’s doing an SAT, these modules are doing a TUS, but it’s all common, so you can then share that information, which improves compliance.

AI and Running Processes (28:25)

Doug Glenn: I want to come back to AI. How is this platform going to help end users in running processes? Is there anything in the system, as far as AI goes, that would help?

Peter Sherwin: The ability to pull data and control together means we can start to look at the set-point program as the cycle is running. One of the new functions we’re creating is something called Batch Validator. Think from an operator’s point of view about what they need to do as the process is running, when it finishes, and to sign off and make sure it meets all its requirements. Typically, today, they may need to refer to some other guidance that specifies that this run must be within this tolerance at this level or that it’s had a guaranteed soak between these soak time points. It’s not easy for an operator to see whether the requirements has been met or not, because it’s just a line. That’s the one thing AI and Batch Validator will do — overlay the specifications for that run of the process and show very clearly if it’s deviated or not. It takes that kind of human error and guesswork away from an operator and gives them more information.

Doug Glenn: Do the current standards allow for an automated check on the validation of the load, or will that have to change?

Peter Sherwin: I fully believe in “human in the loop.” Obviously, I’m human. So, there will always be a check. But this really helps as an operator aid, because it’s just checking the screen. Ultimately, the person signing off has to be a real person.

The Future of Heat Treating (31:11)

Doug Glenn: To wrap up, tell us what you think the future of heat treating will look like.

Peter Sherwin: That’s a really good question. It depends on the time scale. I think we’re kind of clear about efficient and reliable running for the next few years. We know we can help with that, but how is it going to structurally change?

I think the operator is going to have a much, much bigger role. There have been less operators in plants. But think about maintenance skills, quality experience, and personnel retiring from the industry. We will have a real problem unless we arm the operator with the ability to do quality, a level of maintenance, and even purchasing.

I think the operator of the future is going to be very multi-skilled but also assisted by AI. We’re seeing it in different areas of our business, how people are moving and taking on more responsibility because of AI. Correlate that with a future where the operator’s going to be that key person and may not require anyone else around to fully run that furnace and run it profitably, with a minimum amount of energy, and making sure it has all the right consumables to keep on running. They’ll manage that whole operation. I think that will be a trend into the future.

Doug Glenn: That is actually a very interesting trend, because with the use of AI, I would expect to see less operators, but I like your perspective. We’ll have to come back in ten years and see how well it panned out. 


About the Guest

Peter Sherwin
Director of Strategic Marketing
Watlow

Peter Sherwin leads strategic marketing at Watlow and brings more than 30 years of experience across heat treatment, industrial technology, business development, and product marketing. His career has included leadership roles with Watlow, Schneider Electric, DOWA HighTemp Furnaces, and Aalberts surface technologies, with experience spanning the United States, United Kingdom, and India. He also holds an MBA from Henley Business School.

For more information: Contact Peter Sherwin at Peter.Sherwin@watlow.com.

Heat Treat Radio #135: Modernizing Heat Treat with a Unified Process Platform Read More »

Ask the Heat Treat Doctor®: What are the Heat Tint Colors for Stainless Steel and When Do They Form?

Ask The Heat Treat Doctor® has returned to bring sage advice to Heat Treat Today readers and to answer your questions about heat treating, brazing, sintering, and other types of thermal treatments as well as questions on metallurgy, equipment, and process-related issues. In this installment, Dan Herring explores the heat tint colors that form on stainless steel during heating and cooling — how the surface oxide layer thickens and shifts through straw, bronze, peacock, and blue hues at specific temperatures and explains the factors, such as chromium content, oxygen levels, time, and surface roughness, that influence how and when these colors appear.

This informative piece was first released in Heat Treat Today’s June 2026 Sixth Annual Buyers Guide Issue print edition.


Most heat treaters, engineers, and clients are familiar with temper colors on steels (Herring 2014, ASM International 1991) and often assume that these color tints (hues) are the same for stainless steels (Table A). However, there are subtle changes that are worth noting. Let’s learn more.

Table A. Heat Tint Color Chart for Stainless Steels | Source: The HERRING GROUP, Inc.

The Science Behind Heat Tint Colors

Figure 1. Examples of color tints | Image Credit: Abbott Furnace Company

When stainless steel is exposed to an air atmosphere, or a high dew point moisture-laden atmosphere during heating or cooling, its surface changes color; that is, a thin oxide layer forms on the surface (Figure 1). This heat tint color (aka temper color) is caused by a progressive thickening of the surface oxide layer.

As most of us know, an invisible (aka passive) layer occurs naturally on stainless steels. It is extremely thin, typically in the order of 1 to 3 nanometers (3.93 x 10⁻⁸ to 1.18 x 10⁻⁷ inches) thick.

Upon exposure to air during heating or holding at temperature, this oxide layer grows in thickness. When it is approximately 20–30 nanometers (7.87 x 10⁻⁷ inches) thick, it starts to become visible to the human eye as a light-yellow or straw yellow color tint.

As the oxide layer becomes even thicker it transitions from almost transparent to a variety of different colors (e.g., bronze, peacock, blue).

As the oxide layer thickness increases from 20 nm to roughly 50–100 nm (1.97 x 10⁻⁶ to 3.94 x 10⁻⁶ inches), the colors deepen changing to a golden yellow, to a deep straw, to a bronze or golden brown, to peacock (a purplish-blue), to full blue, then light gray, and finally dark gray.

Above 100 nm (3.94 x 10⁻⁶ inches,) up to approximately 850 nm (3.35 x 10⁻⁵ inches) the tint transitions from dark blue/gray to black.

Such shallow oxides are known to enhance corrosion resistance on various stainless steel grades.

Factors Influencing Color Change

Several factors influence the type of oxide that forms on the surface, its adhesion to the surface, and how quickly the thickness of the oxide will grow (BSSA).

Chromium

From a purely material standpoint, the single most important element is the chromium (Cr) content of the stainless steel. To be classified as a stainless steel, it must contain a minimum of 10.5–11% Cr. The higher the chromium content, not only is the alloy more heat resistant, but the heat tint color formation mechanism is retarded.

Oxygen Content

Figure 2. Bright and discolored stainless steel parts run in a continuous brazing furnace. The discolored part was caused by room air infiltrating into the cooling zone at high levels (> 50 ppm) from the exit of the furnace. | Image Credit: The HERRING GROUP, Inc.

Another factor that influences the rate of oxide formation and the thickness of the oxide is the oxygen content of the atmosphere (Figure 2). Air is approximately 21% oxygen. Nitrogen, however, contains between 0.01–5% oxygen depending on its source, while argon has less than 0.0005% oxygen. By contrast, water vapor contains around 89% oxygen.

As anyone who has run stainless steel in vacuum furnaces knows, stainless parts can be discolored due to such factors as an air leak during heating or cooling, a pinhole water leak in a heat exchanger which opens during cooling in one temperature range and close again at a lower temperature, or air infiltration in the backfill gas supply.

Time

Time plays a factor as well. The longer the exposure time, the deeper the heat tint color.

Surface Roughness

Finally, surface roughness influences both the rate of oxidation and the heat tint color formation. Rougher surfaces tend to oxidize at a higher rate and with all other factors remaining the same, deeper colors are produced.

Final Thoughts

Knowing the color tints that may form on the surface of stainless steel is invaluable in helping the heat treater explain this phenomenon to their clients and/or troubleshoot their equipment and processes in an attempt to minimize or eliminate undesirable surface tints on the stainless steel parts that they run.

References

  1. Herring, Daniel H. 2014. Atmosphere Heat Treatment, Volume I (Section 5.8). BNP Media Group II.
  2. ASM International. 1991. ASM Handbook, Volume 4: Heat Treating. p. 960.
  3. British Stainless Steel Association (BSSA). bssa.org.uk.

About the Author

Dan Herring
“The Heat Treat Doctor”
The HERRING GROUP, Inc.

Dan Herring has been in the industry for over 50 years and has gained vast experience in fields that include materials science, engineering, metallurgy, new product research, and many other areas. He is the author of six books and over 700 technical articles.

For more information: Contact Dan at dherring@heat-treat-doctor.com.

For more information about Dan’s books: see his page at the Heat Treat Store.


Ask the Heat Treat Doctor®: What are the Heat Tint Colors for Stainless Steel and When Do They Form? Read More »

Answers in the Atmosphere: Industrial Gas Supplier Tech Support Part 1

In this Technical Tuesday installment of Answers in the Atmosphere, David (Dave) Wolff, an independent expert focusing on industrial atmospheres for heat treat applications, examines how technical support has evolved from a value-added service into a key differentiator among industrial gas suppliers. Drawing on industry history and insights from Messer LLC, Wolff explores the range of support models available today and the factors heat treaters should consider when evaluating gas supply partnerships beyond price alone.

This informative piece was first released in Heat Treat Today’s July 2026 Annual Super Brands Issue print edition.


Do you have the technical support you need? Not all industrial gas suppliers are the same when it comes to technical support and gas delivery offerings. A critical look must be taken to consider how much technical support you can be looking to your supplier for when signing a gas contract.

We’ll look at a bit of history of the differentiation of technical support offerings in the industrial gases space before homing in on how one specific has supplier, Messer LLC, offers their support so you can better evaluate the cost of gas supply alongside the level of technical support your operations may require.

A Bit of History

Industrial gases have long been treated as commodities, making differentiation among suppliers a persistent challenge. In the early years of the industry (through the 1950s), gas applications were narrowly utilized, especially for the primary steelmaking and refining industries, and most technical knowledge remained with these end user rather than the supplier.

To increase traction with their smaller manufacturing clients, industrial gas suppliers began pairing gas delivery with technical support to help these clients use gases safely and achieve productivity gains. This full-service model propelled increased industrial gas adoption across more general industries.

By the 1970s, the use of industrial gases had become more widespread to include industries like heat treating. Clients were increasing their knowledge of these gases and sought to improve labor and energy efficiency as well as reduce manufacturing costs.

This knowledge increase brought intensified competition for suppliers, prompting a shift toward offering range of service models. Some suppliers reduced or separated technical support to compete on price, while others continued to emphasize integrated service and application expertise. For example, in the 1980s Airgas reduced their technical support to provide a bare product approach at a lower price point. This action prompted other major gas suppliers to adjust their approach and offer technical support selectively, and at times for an additional cost.

Today, these technical support offerings are widely varied. The rest of the discussion is taken from an interview I was privileged to have with Grzegorz Moroz, program manager at Messer LLC.

Supporting Furnace Owners in a Changing Environment

Moroz first spoke about heat treaters’ long reliance on gases to maintain furnace atmospheres. Early-generation atmospheres, such as exothermic and endothermic gas, acetylene, and dissociated ammonia, were effective for their time. Over the past decades, industrial gas companies have advanced the safe use of nitrogen- and hydrogen-based atmospheres among others to deliver greater precision and tighter process control.

According to Moroz, furnace owners face multiple challenges:

  • Higher quality expectations with shorter lead times and reduced costs
  • Increasing safety and emissions regulations
  • Greater automation across operations
  • A less experienced and more transient workforce

Types of Support

Industrial gas companies, Moroz continues, vary widely in the level of support they may offer. Some focus on gas delivery or a specific expertise, while others offer comprehensive technical, safety, and application support as part of the overall supply relationship. For Messer, solutions are tailored from a team of technical and product experts that support heat treating from efficient, safe, and reliable operations as well as play review.

Access to Support

There are different commercial models industrial gas providers employ to enable their services, explains Moroz. While most will not provide ongoing assistance to facilities supplied by their competitors to avoid conflicts of interest, practices vary across the industry. Even so, contract structures often limit many suppliers from being flexible in delivering technical resources. Informal technical advice may be provided occasionally from gas suppliers that maintain in-house expertise.

Multi-supplier arrangements are common. This may be due to increased volume demands, supply security, strategies, or differing gas specifications, so Messer routinely navigates this reality. However, be aware that larger suppliers often prefer being the sole provider of all gas requirements at a site.

In part 2, we’ll talk more about what’s involved in an installation technical assessment and considering the right industry supplier expert.

About The Author:

David (Dave) Wolff
Industrial Gas Professional
Wolff Engineering

Dave Wolff has over 40 years of project engineering, industrial gas generation and application engineering, marketing, and sales experience. Dave holds a degree in engineering science from Dartmouth College. Currently, he consults in the areas of industrial gas and chemical new product development and commercial introduction, as well as market development and selling practices.

For more information: Contact Dave Wolff at Wolff-eng@icloud.com.

Answers in the Atmosphere: Industrial Gas Supplier Tech Support Part 1 Read More »

Why Heat Matters and the Need for Speed

In this installment of Technical Tuesday, Jim Roberts of U.S. Ignition engages readers in a Combustion Corner editorial about the role of velocity in heat treating — breaking down how faster burner speeds create more turbulence in the furnace, which helps parts heat up faster and more evenly.

This editorial was first released in Heat Treat Today’s June 2026 6th Annual Buyers Guide Issue print edition.


A furnace guy walks into a heat treat plant and looks around. While it all looks calm and controlled, the agitation inside the furnaces is rampant.

So many times, we forget to slow down, look over our shoulders, and see all we’ve accomplished or learned. Combustion Corner series began with the intent to take a simple, almost primer-level look at what combustion-related issues the modern heat treater — furnace technicians, production managers, and really everybody involved in the process — may encounter.

The focus has been on burners and flame-related items. Occasionally, we get questions for an opinion on considering gas-fired versus electric furnaces or other similar questions. That’s dangerous ground to tread because so many different processes can use both. In fact in most cases, the method of heating is really moot to the process goal: Get heat delivered, cleanly, and all will be well with the parts and the process.

With that in mind, let’s take a peek at what really matters in heat treating. It’s the heat. Specifically, it’s how to get heat delivered as quickly as possible and with as much control as is possible. I know, kind of obvious that heat is important in heat treating. There are “four modes of heat transfer,” but we’ll just look at one of them today.

Convective Transfer

Convective transfer is an easy one because we see so many practical applications in our own homes. The new ovens in the modern home are often convection ovens and seemingly everybody has an air fryer. In the kitchen alone, you can see this how heat transfer increases can happen via convection increases. Take this principle to the shop floor and you can see how critical it is in processes that allow contact with flue gases or hot air.

We used to heat up the box of bricks, and once it got to the needed temperature for the metallurgy requirement, we would push in a basket of parts and wait for them to catch up to that temperature. The thermal mass of the load would literally suck the heat right out of the box, and the temperature would crash. Then, we’d wait for the temperature to stabilize. Once there, the old rules of time and temperature would apply.

But what if we wanted to speed up the process? What if we wanted more even temperature delivery and more temperature uniformity? The word that comes to mind in most burner intrinsic processes is velocity.

Velocity

We talked about how some direct-fired burners are now designed to give fantastic exit velocities from the burner and into the furnace chamber. And when I say fantastic, it has to do with comparing what was an acceptable burner design back in the early days of industrial America when burner flame/flue gas exit velocity of direct-fired heat treating was like 40 MPH. New burners of today have exit velocities of almost 500 MPH!

Here is why it matters: Velocity will have a direct effect on the heat transfer, firstly by blasting into the “boundary layer” of gases that circulate around parts in the furnace. And most flue gases have been laminar in nature, but with this increased turbulence, the agitation of these gases allows more direct contact with the actual part.

The Reynolds Number

This increased turbulence results in a higher Reynolds number. The Reynolds number (Re) is a dimensionless quantity in fluid mechanics that predicts flow patterns — laminar (smooth) or turbulent (chaotic) — by calculating the ratio of inertial forces to viscous forces.

The word viscous reminds us that all things flowing around in the furnace are considered fluid from a scientific viewpoint. Interestingly, all this turbulence also results in greater mass transport. Remembering that the part or load has some mass, once it begins to heat up, it actually begins to emit heat as well. This mass transport mechanism is a result of the turbulence moving the heated molecules away from the surface of the part more quickly, which maintains a higher temperature differential, and again, increases heat transfer.

I guess what we are doing here is starting with velocity on a burner-level discussion, and we will discuss multiple methods and scientific quirks regarding the big picture — heat transfer. We will discuss some of the basics of heat transfer and explore comparisons between conduction, radiation, and convection, and more.

Till next time…

About The Author:

Jim Roberts
President
US Ignition

Jim Roberts president at U.S. Ignition, began his 45-year career in the burner and heat recovery industry focused on heat treating specifically in 1979. He worked for and helped start up WB Combustion in Hales Corners, Wisconsin. In 1985 he joined Eclipse Engineering in Rockford, IL, specializing in heat treating-related combustion equipment/burners. Inducted into the American Gas Association’s Hall of Flame for service in training gas company field managers, Jim is a former president of MTI and has contributed to countless seminars on fuel reduction and combustion-related practices.

For more information: Contact Jim Roberts at jim@usignition.com.

Why Heat Matters and the Need for Speed Read More »

Answers in the Atmosphere: Hydrogen Part 2 — Costs and Gas Blend Generation

In this installment of Answers in the Atmosphere, David (Dave) Wolff, an independent expert focusing on industrial atmospheres for heat treat applications, examines the cost dynamics of hydrogen as a process gas and the blended atmospheres strategies thermal processors use to manage them. Drawing on insights from Stephen Feldbauer PhD of Abbott Furnace, Wolff walks through the key gas blend options available to operators and how operators select the most cost-effective mix for the job.

This informative piece was first released in Heat Treat Today’s May 2026 Sustainable Heat Treat Technologies print edition.


In last month’s column, we discussed hydrogen as a process gas and addressed key attributes. In that column and in the one that follows, Stephen Feldbauer PhD, director of Research & Development at Abbott Furnace, provided key insights.

A Question of Cost

Stephen Feldbauer PhD
Director of Research & Development
Abbott Furnace

Hydrogen gas is relatively expensive; in fact, case studies conducted by Abbott Furnace have demonstrated that atmosphere costs often constitute over two-thirds of the variable costs of thermal processing. Hence, cost savings in hydrogen-containing atmosphere supply are important.

As a result, thermal processors will preferentially employ gas blends, containing just the right amount of hydrogen to get the job done, diluted in a larger volume of inert or non-problematic diluent gas. Think of it like using a small amount of powerful dish soap diluted with a large volume of water to effectively clean a large amount of pots and pans. The primary advantage to using hydrogen-blended atmospheres is that they are much less expensive than using pure hydrogen.

Hydrogen-Nitrogen Blended

Pure hydrogen, delivered or generated on-site, may be blended with pure nitrogen to reduce atmosphere costs. While nitrogen can be delivered as a gas or liquid, it can also be separated from atmospheric air on-site at low cost to produce a hydrogen-nitrogen blended atmosphere. Hydrogen-nitrogen blended atmospheres typically range in hydrogen content from about 3% to 75% hydrogen, with the balance nitrogen. Nitrogen costs the thermal processor about 20% of the cost of hydrogen for a similar volume of gas, so blending hydrogen with nitrogen may be a useful approach to obtaining the benefits of a hydrogen-based atmosphere at substantially lower cost.

The actual blend of hydrogen and nitrogen used is primarily determined by the metal that is being thermally processed. As the oxide of one metal may be more stable and difficult to reduce than another, the amount of hydrogen is often increased to make the atmosphere more active. Some metals will be adversely affected by nitrogen at high temperatures. Thermal processors using a hydrogen-nitrogen atmosphere will use furnace atmosphere mixers to blend the leanest (lowest hydrogen) atmosphere that yields acceptable results in the finished metal parts.

Image Credit: Abbott Furnace

A widely used generation approach to a hydrogen-nitrogen atmosphere is to use a thermal catalytic reactor (a “dissociator”) to crack metallurgical grade ammonia (NH₃) to a gas blend of nominal 75% hydrogen, 25% nitrogen (based on the ratio of nitrogen and hydrogen atoms in the ammonia starting gas). Because ammonia is a commonly used agricultural and industrial chemical, ammonia is widely available and cost-effective. Ammonia is delivered by truck in pressurized liquid form and stored in a tank for use.

The resulting atmosphere gas blend is generally called dissociated ammonia (DA). Significantly less expensive than using pure hydrogen, DA gas is a popular gas blend if a nitrogen-containing gas blend can be used. If decreased reducing potential is acceptable, generated DA gas can be further diluted with pure nitrogen to reduce costs even more.

Generation from Hydrocarbon

Another approach to cost-reducing hydrogen-containing atmospheres is to generate a hydrogen-containing atmosphere from a readily available hydrocarbon, such as natural gas, propane, or even methanol. This is possible because these hydrocarbons can be thermally cracked using a catalytic reactor to liberate free molecular hydrogen gas in a blend with other constituents. These reactors may use partial combustion in the case of Exothermic reactors to make Exo gas, or they may use pure thermal cracking, avoiding combustion, in which case the technique is called Endothermic gas generation, and the resulting gas is often called Endo gas.

Because Exo gas is a result of partial combustion with air, an Exo gas blend has approximately 10% hydrogen and considerable nitrogen in it, whereas Endo gas has approximately 40% hydrogen and very low levels of nitrogen. Because both Exo and Endo gases contain considerable carbon (originating from the fuel gas), their uses are limited to processes and materials where the carbon content does not create processing issues.

Argon-Hydrogen Blend

Many of the stainless steel grades cannot be thermally processed in nitrogen-containing atmospheres because the nitrogen gas will react with the chromium, damaging the alloy. In that case, an argon-hydrogen blend may be employed. Because argon is more expensive than hydrogen, the economics of an argon-hydrogen gas blend may result in much higher levels of hydrogen in the furnace atmosphere.

About The Author:

David (Dave) Wolff
Industrial Gas Professional
Wolff Engineering

Dave Wolff has over 40 years of project engineering, industrial gas generation and application engineering, marketing, and sales experience. Dave holds a degree in engineering science from Dartmouth College. Currently, he consults in the areas of industrial gas and chemical new product development and commercial introduction, as well as market development and selling practices.

For more information: Contact Dave Wolff at Wolff-eng@icloud.com.

Answers in the Atmosphere: Hydrogen Part 2 — Costs and Gas Blend Generation Read More »

Heat Treat Radio #134: Optimizing Power Delivery in Thermal Processing


In this episode of Heat Treat Radio, host Heather Falcone sits down with Casey O’Neill, vice president of Sales and Marketing at RoMan Manufacturing, to discuss a holistic approach to energy efficiency in thermal processing. Casey explains how furnace power systems, transformer placement, electrification strategies, and data-driven monitoring can significantly impact operating costs, maintenance requirements, and overall performance. The conversation also explores how emerging technologies such as digital twins and AI-driven analytics may help heat treaters address workforce challenges while improving energy management and productivity.

Below, you can watch the video, listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or read an edited transcript.




The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.

Introduction (00:04)

Heather Falcone: Hi, I’m Heather Falcone. Welcome to Heat Treat Radio.

Today we’re talking about holistic solutions to thermal processing system energy efficiency. We’re on-site with the sponsor of today’s episode, RoMan Manufacturing, in Wyoming, Michigan. We had the opportunity to take a tour before recording, so thank you to RoMan for hosting us. Joining me today is Casey O’Neill, vice president of Sales and Marketing. Thanks for joining me today, Casey.

Heat Treat Radio host Heather Falcone (left) sits with the vice president of Sales and Marketing at RoMan Manufacturing, Casey O’Neill (right), on-site at RoMan Manufacturing in Michigan

Casey O’Neill: Thank you for being here. We’re excited to host you and record this on the RoMan campus.

Heather Falcone: You get the whole episode to talk about energy efficiency, but I’d like to start by having you tell us a little about yourself and your background. Since we’re at your facility, you get to do your own introduction and tell us a little about RoMan.

Casey O’Neill: I’m Casey O’Neill, vice president of Sales and Marketing at RoMan Manufacturing. I’ve been with RoMan for a number of years, and where I actually started working at RoMan was selling our products into the furnace market.

This segment of industry is really near and dear to my heart. It’s where I got my start in the business. I’m really excited to be able to discuss all the ways that RoMan Manufacturing specifically works to improve the efficiency of electrically heated furnaces within the heat treating industry and how we can help heat treaters money, while improving operational efficiency.

Heather Falcone: I think there are a lot of misconceptions about what can actually be done with energy efficiency. I’d love to dispel some of those myths and help educate people so that making changes to an energy system does not seem so intimidating.

Casey O’Neill: Absolutely. RoMan has a strong history in a variety of different industries, which allows us to take lessons that we’ve learned from one industry and apply them to other industries where that knowledge may not be understood yet.

That’s what we’ve been working to do within the furnace segment is apply our understanding of power and efficiency and how they relate to each other on different pieces of equipment and introduce those to improve the operations of heat treating companies.

Company History (2:53)

Heather Falcone: That’s really how the company got started, right?

Image Credit: RoMan Manufacturing

Casey O’Neill: Correct. RoMan was founded in 1980 by Dietrich Roth and Robert Hoffman. Dietrich was a brilliant engineer in the power transformation space. His focus was on optimizing power density in a resistance welding transformer.

He developed ways to create the power that was needed in a more compact box. As RoMan has evolved over the last 46 years, we’ve taken that concept and technology and expanded it across the products that we offer different industries.

RoMan supplies products for resistance welding, which is where the company started. We also provide power supplies for glass manufacturing, heat treating furnaces, sintering furnaces, and crystal growing furnaces. Outside of thermal processing, we develop power supplies for specialized projects that require high current. One of RoMan’s strengths is rectifying high-current AC power into high-current DC power.

The expertise needed to do that is fairly limited globally. So, we take on very specialized projects for the government and large primes to put that technology into practice for their applications.

Casey O’Neill: As it relates to heat treating furnaces, over the last five years, there’s been a significant shift toward electrically heated furnaces. In some cases, companies are looking at converting gas-fired furnaces to electrically heated furnaces. A large part of this trend has to do with broader global electrification initiatives and decarbonization goals. As more and more furnaces are electrified and as more people are looking to buy electrically heated furnaces, our goal is to ensure this industry understands how to optimize that electric power so that the energy is being used by the furnace and not just burning into the air.

Water-Cooled Transformers (6:05)

Heather Falcone: When we talk about energy efficiency and thermal processing, beyond heat loss and leakage, what are the biggest inefficiencies that you’re seeing in heat treat operations today?

Casey O’Neill: From RoMan’s perspective, our core product is high-current, low-voltage, water-cooled transformers. We also integrate those power devices into power systems, like controls, breakers, PLCs, and communication with the main control system.

Single phase water-cooled transformer | Image Credit: RoMan Manufacturing

One of the key features is water cooling. In a lot of industries, there are applications where having a water-cooled transformer device is going to make the system more optimized than an air-cooled transformer would. While going to an air-cooled transformer may have a lower upfront cost, if you look at the total cost of ownership versus a power supply that integrates RoMan water-cooled device, because of the equipment optimizations, that will save money on energy and maintenance in the long run. RoMan builds our transformers in a way that integrates the water cooling right into the circuit of the transformer, creating a low-profile, high-power density product. The transformers are fully potted and completely sealed off from the elements. Like I said, we used to test our transformers by submerging them in a fish tank and powering them up to show that water could not get into the transformer and short it out. This allows the transformer to not have to be in a box, so it can be mounted on any equipment, because as long as you’re running the cooling water through the transformer, it’s not going to overheat. It’s impervious to any of the outside elements that you would normally put a different type of transformer in a box for. This allows the transformer to be mounted very close to a power feed-through of a furnace.

Related Reading: New to furnace power systems? Click on the image above to learn about how electricity travels through a vacuum furnace and why transformer placement matters.

Mounting the transformer in this way has many advantages. The secondary side of a transformer, the output side, is the high-current side of the furnace, and the high-current side of an electric circuit is the drastically more inefficient side of the electric circuit because current is heat.

On the primary side, it’s going to be higher voltage and lower current, but when you’re stepping down the voltage and stepping up the current, which is what you do in a transformer on a resistance-heated furnace, you’re creating a high-current, low-voltage secondary.

Well, high current is high heat. If you’re running high-current through big secondary cables from the transformer to the furnace, every foot of that cable is generating heat and wasting energy. So, you’re paying for energy that’s just going into the air.

Heather Falcone: And you’re heating the whole plant at the same time for nothing.

Casey O’Neill: Exactly. You then either have uncomfortable employees, or you need to get a bigger air conditioner.

What RoMan is working to integrate into this industry is remote mounting of transformers directly next to or close-coupled to the power feed-through of the furnace. By doing that, you’re eliminating the secondary cables altogether.

Not only does that save you energy losses in those cables, but those cables are also water-cooled, so you eliminate having to water-cool the cables. If they are air-cooled, and then they’re kicking heat off into the building. They’re also a large maintenance item and can be difficult to handle.

I’ve been to many different heat treating facilities, and I’ve talked with operators about integrating RoMan transformers where you’re closely coupling them to the power feeders and eliminating the cables. One of the operators joked with me and said he’d be my best friend forever if we could eliminate all those cables because of how difficult they are to do maintenance on. When you have a cable fail, it must be removed and replaced. RoMan is trying to eliminate those cables and mount this transformer right next to the power feed-through, making it more efficient and easier to maintain. We can do this because we’ve created a high-power, low-profile density transformer, that is impervious to elements; it can be outside of a box and mounted right next to the furnace.

Heather Falcone: That makes sense. When you’re looking for a system, you’re looking for something that decreases that, the past of least resistance, right? Faster, quicker, and easier.

Workforce Challenges (12:14)

Heather Falcone: The population of working people is shrinking, and in the next 10 years, it’s going to be the lowest it’s ever been. As such, it’s going to get harder to find and hire maintenance personnel, furnace operators, and electrical technicians. If companies eliminate that problem entirely, it’s a win-win.

Casey O’Neill: Exactly. One of the biggest challenges I see in the near-term future is a massive loss of knowledge base.

Across the heat treating industry, there are incredibly knowledgeable and experienced people that have kept heat treating companies running for the last 50 years that are approaching retirement.

As they leave the workforce, that knowledge base is not easily replaced. It’s quickly becoming one of the major challenges of not just heat treating but every industry.

Adoption of New Furnace Technology (13:30)

Casey O’Neill: At RoMan, our core product is high-current, low-voltage, water-cooled transformers, but we are also integrating some of this core product into broader power systems. As we start to integrate, we are also trying to create enough data feedback. We can monitor current, voltage, resistance values, and other parameters. With digital controls, that data can be extrapolated and fed back into the furnace system.

This is where we get into some fun technology. There are companies that can create a digital twin of a piece of equipment by engaging with the equipment and component manufacturers and the OEMs to understand how all of it behaves together.

If we see the transformer temperature internally rising, what does that mean or what could be causing that? If we see a certain part of the furnace inside getting a lot hotter, there are thermocouples inside reading the temperature.

They create a digital twin, and by integrating artificial intelligence, it can start to run simulations in real time, which allows them to communicate next steps with the operator based on what they are seeing with their simulations. So, as experienced personnel enter retirement, we’re going to need to start integrating more of this type of technology into systems or these systems will not operate as well as they should, which means productivity will decrease significantly.

One of the things that RoMan is actively pursuing is determining what feedback our power system can provide to the overall furnace system that’s going to feed into this digital twin and AI simulation to ensure that the furnace can continue to operate in a high productivity fashion, while simultaneously eliminating the challenge of our aging knowledge base.

Related Reading: As furnace systems become more connected, digital controls play an increasingly important role in energy efficiency. Click on the image above to learn about how communication between power systems and furnace controls can reduce energy consumption and support sustainability goals.

Heather Falcone: Right. When you’re undertaking a project like energy efficiency, our tendency might be to focus just on that piece of equipment, and we may miss the opportunity to look at the larger picture and incorporate every piece of equipment.

Casey O’Neill: Exactly. As electrification of heat treating furnaces continues, the operational expense of electricity becomes one of the biggest expenses for heat treat operations. So, managing electric consumption has to become one of the most critical issues to address in order to be profitable.

At RoMan, we don’t just try to sell our products, we try to really engage with the users of our products in every industry that we work in so that they understand from our side how to most efficiently use our products in their system as a way to help the overall OPEX of electricity in a heat treating company, keeping it as minimal as possible or at least as efficient as possible. That way, they are only paying for electricity that is actually used to heat treat products and not paying to kick off energy into the air.

Heather Falcone: Let’s talk a little bit about that whole process that you’ve come up with, because many heat treaters are working with legacy systems. It can seem daunting to go from a VRT to this solution. What do you recommend for how they can attack this issue without being intimidated and rejecting the project entirely?

Casey O’Neill: In a number of industries that we work with, this fear is common. Nobody wants to be first. Everybody wants to be second. If we have new technology, they don’t necessarily want to be the first one to be innovative and integrate it into their system because they also don’t want to be the reason that production goes down if it fails.

So, you have systems with legacy products that have been working for decades and that makes people very comfortable with that system. Even if we can make drastic improvements on the overall operational expense, they are motivated by job security, so they want to work with products and technology they feel comfortable with.

We engage with both small and large captive and commercial heat treaters, and what I found is when you engage with a company that has a group that’s really focused on energy efficiency, especially as electrification grows, those people end up having a lot more say in what technology ends up being integrated into a system.

RoMan has a number of systems integrated into heat treating furnaces, and within our product offerings we have different types of power systems used in various applications. We have air-cooled transformers manufactured at our facility in Grand Haven, Michigan, and we have our high-current, low-voltage water-cooled transformers that are 60 hertz, 480-volt input, very basic, that are integrated into different furnace systems.

Our legacy began in resistance welding in the automotive world. If you’ve ever seen the commercials for vehicle manufacturers where you have the metal frame of a car going down an assembly line with robotic arms moving around, sparks flying — that’s resistance welding. It’s a bad example because when you’re doing the welds, you don’t want sparks, but sparks are good for TV.

That’s a resistance weld. On that robot is a weld gun, and in that weld gun is likely (if it’s in North America) a very small RoMan transformer. The input into that transformer is 1,000 hertz, 620 volts, and it’s coming from an IGBT control. In that industry, in the late ’80s/early ’90s, they started to go from larger stationary spot-welding stations to this robotic welding. They’re putting thousands of amps through that little weld gun, and if they were to use an AC transformer, it would be large, and then they would be running those big heavy cables to the weld gun. Also, robots move around so much, so you end up having a lot of maintenance issues and inefficiencies.

By integrating this IGBT control that can put out 1,000 hertz, you can exponentially shrink the core of the transformer, which makes the transformer size shrink significantly. Now since the ’90s, almost every automotive line is using an IGBT control and a really small, high-current, low-voltage, water-cooled transformer that’s in the weld gun connected to where the weld tips are.

RoMan takes something that’s been used for 40 years in one industry and realized there were many applications that would benefit from integrating this type of technology onto a furnace. When you’re running continuous heat for a long time, you end up creating a lot of inefficiencies, which can get really technical. 

This system overcomes many inefficiencies using these different types of technology that all look different from what people are used to seeing. What we are trying to do is educate people on the uses of these new technologies and the benefits of their integration on furnaces, particularly the improvement of operational expenses, electrical efficiencies, and also maintenance.

Furnace Integration — Retrofits (24:24)

Heather Falcone: We have discussed RoMan and the systems. Tell me about integration at the furnace level.

Casey O’Neill: As I have mentioned, we have different furnace applications that use different versions of our technology. For commercial heat treaters, heat treating is how they make money, managing operational expenses of the equipment is absolutely critical to profitability.

We have conducted several trials and product integrations where we’ve worked directly with heat treaters to retrofit equipment so they can start to understand and see the operational gains from using our products.

Related Reading: Casey discusses how power controls affect furnace efficiency and performance. Click on the image above for a deeper look at IGBTs and matching controls to heating loads.

In one case, we had a commercial heat treater that had a vacuum furnace with a large legacy power supply. We have some different data loggers that measure and log power data. We hooked them up to a power logger, and had them operate normally, run different parts that they normally run through that furnace, and we just logged the power data, the kVA, kW, the reactive power, and the power factor — parameters that matter when it comes to power and what the utility companies bill people for. Then we examined that data, and we saw that the power supply that they had for the work that they were doing was oversized.

One of the changes that we could make to optimize the operation of the power supply was to size it more according to their needs. In this case, we retrofitted that furnace with an IGBT control and our small MFDC transformer. We sized the kVA down more to their needs to add some efficiency to the system.

We had them turn it back on and operate normally, using the same parts. We logged the power again and we were able to compare the different runs. We also had them run a burnout run so we could compare the burnouts. As we were doing that, we noticed one run that they were doing after we retrofitted the furnace that wasn’t in any of the logs from before we retrofitted it. We did not know where it came from. The company explained that there is a certain part that they heat treat for a customer and that particular process has a very, very fast ramp rate to get to a very high temperature. In their facility, they only have one furnace that they can do that particular cycle on. After we retrofitted this furnace, they decided to try this particular process, and they were able to do it.

Heather Falcone: That’s awesome.

Casey O’Neill: Keep in mind; this was actually a smaller kVA transformer than what was on that furnace before. The output of this transformer is DC, not AC, and AC has a sine wave, which kind of goes like that, and there’s a zero point where it’s always crossing zero. Every time it crosses zero, it’s off for just a little bit. We’re talking milliseconds. But then it has to reheat a little bit. It continues heating, and then it’s off as it crosses zero again.

The MFDC, however, is DC power. DC power is just on, so you’re just managing how much it’s on. As a result, you never have to do that little reheat before you continue heating like you do with AC power.

The best explanation, and this is anecdotal, not data-driven, is when they retrofitted that furnace with DC power, because that DC can just stay on, they were able to ramp much faster and hotter. Even though it was a lower kVA transformer, it still had enough power to get up to temperature. Also, because of the DC power, it was a much better heat, so it could get up to temperature much faster and allow them to do that cycle.

So operationally, they’re now able to run that particular process in two furnaces instead of one. Double the capacity, which is now optimized for a commercial heat treater to be able to shift things around more and have some options when they’re in production.

A burnout run is obviously a lot more power than a different run that’s lower temperature or a shorter period of time. On some of those lower temperature runs, there was about a 4% kilowatt hour difference in consumption after we retrofitted it. For the burnout run, the kilowatt hour difference was actually 18%. By retrofitting, it reduced the real power consumption by 18% on every burnout.

The ability to use DC in a resistance application is always going to make it more efficient. But then also by shortening the secondary, you’re eliminating energy waste, optimizing efficiency, and enhancing maintenance.

In that facility, about half of the furnaces now have that IGBT system and these small MFDC transformers. This is a more expensive system. When you look at the total cost of ownership, you have to weigh the costs, is the value there or not? There are certain cases where it is, and there are certain cases where it is not. As I mentioned, half of their furnaces have this system, and the other half do not. That’s because for half of them, there isn’t enough added value to make this change. But for other furnaces at other heat treating companies, we have AC high-current, low-voltage water-cooled transformers like this where those are integrated. We’ve closely mounted them to the power feed-through, and just by getting rid of those secondary cables, we’ve helped improve the efficiency of the furnace. That one is actually really easy to do the math on savings because different size cables have ratings of heat loss per foot. You can easily do the math. On every foot of cable we eliminate; you’re going to save this much in energy consumption.

In some other cases, the transformer, while important, actually becomes less important than the power control. In some commercial heat treaters and in many captive heat treaters, they may run one part over and over and over again. But they have to make sure that every single time it is done exactly the same. We integrate our transformers into a power system where we’re getting controls and other feedback devices that we integrate into the whole system so you can start to monitor and digitally send all that information into a main equipment PLC, which means they can make a lot more informed decisions on how to manage the equipment to ensure that the output is consistent time and time again.

Heather Falcone: Absolutely. I think that’s important to insert in part of the process. As somebody who’s looking to evaluate energy efficiency, you are looking at retrofit, so you need to get the right partner that can give you the education and the foundation to dispel any worries that you might have right up front.

Furnace Integration — New Equipment & OEMs (34:10)

Heather Falcone: But it’s not just retrofits; you can integrate with brand new equipment. Can you talk a little bit about this and working with OEMs.

Casey O’Neill: In general, RoMan has a history of trying to work with everybody in the supply chain, because I think that we offer different forms of value to different companies within that supply chain. The heat treating industry is no different. Furnace users and heat treaters are the ones that are paying their electric bill. They’re the ones that are paying the furnace operators, the maintenance personnel. They’re buying maintenance parts. For them, the value of the RoMan products is going to all be things that impact their P&L.

But we also work with a number of different furnace OEMs where the value is more on them being able to sell a more optimized piece of equipment to an end user. So, in general, most of the furnace OEMs, especially here in North America, are very familiar with RoMan products. They’re going to understandably be very sensitive to their customer needs and the demand. If I have the best product in the entire world, but my customers don’t want it, I am not going to go out of business holding the best product in the world.

As we work with OEMs, they understand how to integrate the RoMan products in various ways to optimize the equipment. At the end of the day though, it’s based on the demand from a heat treating company that will be buying that equipment. Whether they are going to integrate RoMan, add value, be more technologically advanced, or stick with the legacy equipment because that’s what they know.

Again, the education still needs to go back to the heat treating industry, commercial heat treaters and captive heat treaters, to understand the importance of having a highly optimized piece of equipment in their overall system and what it can do for their bottom line.

That’s really how the demand is going to shift. I’m part of RoMan, and so I will always say how they’re going to demand shift to RoMan. But in general, the demand is going to shift from how companies have done it for 50 years and are comfortable with seeing real value in this new technology because it’s going to optimize their system. It’s going to help them manage the system because they are losing a knowledge base. It’s going to give a better output. It’s going to lower their OPEX. As companies become more and more focused on optimization and value, I think you’re going to see a shift to more advanced technology.

However, what I tell everybody is that what RoMan sells is not new technology; it’s 40 years old. It’s just new to this industry.

Biggest Takeaways (37:48)

Heather Falcone: On that subject, what is the big takeaway that you want our readers and listeners to know from everything that we’ve talked about today?

Casey O’Neill: At Roman Manufacturing, our vision is to be the global brand of choice for industrial power conversion solutions, and the heat treating world is a part of that. We never try to just sell a product. Our goal is to work with our customers and the companies that are using our equipment, even if they’re not directly our customer, to make sure that they not only understand the added value, but also can capture the added value, because it’s one thing to know that a product can add value, and it’s another thing to make sure you’re actually capturing it.

At the end of the day, RoMan is focused on our customer and our user base. We will always support our products to make sure that people are squeezing every drop of value out of it that they can. I think that’s how you create really good partnerships when you’re working together to optimize a furnace system, for example. You start to learn from each other to be able to even optimize the equipment that they’re buying in a bigger way.

Heather Falcone: You can learn from each other, continually improve. We can’t do it without working together.

Casey O’Neill: Exactly.

Heather Falcone: Thank you so much, Casey. I really appreciate you spending time with me today.


About the Guest

Casey O’Neill
Vice President of Sales and Marketing
RoMan Manufacturing

Casey O’Neill is vice president of Sales and Marketing at RoMan Manufacturing, a Grand Rapids, Michigan-based manufacturer of high-current, low-voltage power conversion equipment serving industries including resistance welding, glass, furnace, and other industrial applications.

Casey leads RoMan’s sales, marketing, and market-development efforts with a focus on strategic growth, client partnerships, and expanding RoMan’s presence in global industrial markets. His background includes leadership roles in sales strategy, business development, operations, and manufacturing, giving him a practical understanding of how technical solutions, commercial strategy, and client needs intersect.

For Heat Treat Today, Casey brings a perspective shaped by working closely with industrial clients in demanding thermal-processing, furnace, and power-conversion applications.

For more information: Contact Casey O’Neill at coneill@romanmfg.com.

Heat Treat Radio #134: Optimizing Power Delivery in Thermal Processing Read More »

Heat Treat 2025 Set To Bring Industry Leaders to Detroit

Heat Treat 2025, the 33rd Heat Treating Society Conference and Exhibition, will take place October 21–23, 2025, in Detroit, Michigan, bringing together professionals, researchers, and suppliers from across the industry. In this guest column, Benjamin T. Bernard, president of Heat Treat Society and VP of International Sales at Surface Combustion, discusses what attendees can expect — from an expansive exhibit floor and technical program to new introductory coursework and student competitions.

This insightful piece was first released in Heat Treat Today’s September 2025 Annual People of Heat Treat print edition.


Preparations are in full swing for the 33rd Heat Treating Society Conference and Exhibition, taking place October 21–23, 2025, in Detroit, Michigan. Organized by the ASM Heat Treating Society, the event remains a key gathering for professionals working in thermal processing and heat treating technologies.

This year, Heat Treat 2025 will once again be co-located with three major events: the International Materials, Applications, and Technologies (IMAT) Conference & Expo and ASM’s Annual Meeting; the 12th International Conference on Residual Stresses (ICRS-12); and the AGMA Motion + Power Technology Expo (MPTE). Together, these events deliver unmatched value, offering attendees access to expanded technical content, broader networking opportunities, and a combined exhibit floor of more than 600 companies.

Two keynote speakers have already been confirmed, representing both industrial and academic leadership. Dr. Sridhar Seetharaman, CEO of EPIXC, Professor at Arizona State University, and Joint Affiliate at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and Justin Persinger, Senior Manufacturing Engineer of Manufacturing Process Analysis at General Motors, will share insights from their respective sectors.

The technical program will cover a wide array of important topics, including atmosphere technology, microstructural development, green/low-carbon processes, residual stress, quenching, surface engineering, vacuum processing, and simulation and modeling. The conference continues to emphasize the integration of cutting-edge research with real-world industrial applications.

New in 2025, the Heat Treating Society is launching Heat Treat 101: An Introductory Course on the Fundamentals of Heat Treating. This foundational course is designed for those new to the field or those seeking a refresher on the basics. Topics include principles of steel heat treating, heat treating of aluminum alloys, heat treatment furnace design and operation, and an introduction to the metallography of heat-treated components. Attendees will gain essential insight into materials behavior and processing techniques used across the industry. The course is open to all registered attendees of IMAT 2025, ICRS 2025, and Heat Treat 2025.

Student engagement continues to be a focus. The Fluxtrol Student Research Competition provides an opportunity for students to present research to panels of industry professionals, while the HTS Strong Bar Competition challenges them to optimize heat treatment for strength and ductility. These initiatives help foster the next generation of heat-treating experts.

The event also features several opportunities for community building, such as the Women in Manufacturing and Engineering Breakfast, co-hosted by HTS, ASM International, and AGMA. Open to all attendees, this popular event highlights and celebrates the contributions of women in the field. Other networking highlights include the ASM Leadership Luncheon, the Awards Dinner, and the Evening Networking Event at the Waterview Loft.

The exhibit hall will showcase more than 600 companies through the co-located conferences. Activities on the show floor include a VIP industry tour, Solutions Center presentations, a Welcome Reception, and dedicated programming for students and early-career professionals. With its rich technical content, strong industry partnerships, and inclusive community events, Heat Treat 2025 promises to be a must-attend event. To register and learn more, visit heattreatevent.org.

About The Author:

Benjamin T. Bernard
Heat Treat Society President and VP of International Sales
Surface Combustion

For more information: Contact Heat Treat 2025 at heattreatevent.org.

Heat Treat 2025 Set To Bring Industry Leaders to Detroit Read More »

Sustainability Insights: Data-Driven Process Heat — Why Control Heat When You Can Optimize it?

Smart controls, connected systems, and hybrid energy strategies are reshaping what American manufacturers expect from their process heat equipment. In this Technical Tuesday installment, Markus Kirk, international business development manager for Digitalization and Process Heat at Phoenix Contact, outlines how U.S. process heat OEMs can move beyond basic temperature control toward fully optimized, data-driven thermal system — covering the role of IIoT connectivity, machine learning, virtualization, and cybersecurity standards in building equipment that is audit-ready, energy-efficient, and built for long-term lifecycle value.

This Sustainability Insights article was first published in Heat Treat Today’s May 2026 Sustainable Heat Treat Technologies print edition.


Across the United States, process heat OEMs are shifting from purely mechanical design to software-driven, performance-centered solutions. American manufacturers in aerospace, automotive, medical, defense, and heavy industry expect systems that adapt quickly, deliver consistent results, and support long-term energy and sustainability goals.

Hybrid heating — combining natural gas or hydrogen with electric boosting — is gaining strong momentum in the U.S. because it improves temperature uniformity, shortens recovery times, and reduces emissions. These advantages align with rising energy costs, state-level decarbonization initiatives, and corporate ESG (environmental, social, and governance) commitments. Smart electrode placement and advanced proportional–integral–derivative (PID) strategies help stabilize throughput during production changes, part transitions, and batch-continuous operations, reducing risk and improving repeatability.

Built for U.S. Compliance: Security, Connectivity, Safety & Virtualization

Real-time monitoring, IIoT connectivity, and machine learning (ML) have become essential in American heat treating environments. High-resolution temperature and energy data help operators detect anomalies early, while ML-driven control loops automatically correct deviations. This supports better part quality, higher overall equipment effectiveness (OEE), and fewer unplanned stoppages.

Security expectations in the U.S. are well-defined. NIST CSF and ISA/IEC 62443 guide cyber security hardening; NFPA 86 and ISO 13577 define burner safety and system architecture requirements. OEMs that build equipment around these standards and provide audit-ready documentation stand out in a market where internal audits, client-specific requirements, and on-site assessments are routine.

Virtualization is another driver in the U.S. market, especially within large installed bases. Virtual PLCs and software-defined architecture allow new functionality like load management or predictive energy control, and updated regulation strategies to be added without hardware lock-in. Code written in IEC 61131-3, C++, Python, or Simulink can execute securely at the edge while feeding cloud dashboards and web-based HMIs. This makes modernization and retrofits faster, cleaner, and easier to deploy across geographically distributed facilities.

Engineering Speed and Lifecycle Value for American OEMs

U.S. OEMs must deliver consistent quality across product lines while reducing lead time. Modular function blocks for signal conditioning, ratio/Lambda control, burner management, autotuning PID, ramping, interlocks, and diagnostics support standardized engineering practices from small batch furnaces to large continuous systems. Adding ML-based anomaly detection helps convert operator experience into data-driven best practices, enhancing uptime and enabling scalable remote-service programs — an increasingly important revenue source in the U.S. market.

Accurate temperature measurement remains the foundation of reliable heat treatment. Certified, cybersecure I/O modules ensure precise signal integrity, support regulatory compliance, and reduce panel complexity. This reinforces both product quality and plant safety — critical in industries governed by AMS, CQI-9, Nadcap, and OEM-specific client standards.

Whether American OEMs manufacture high-volume standard equipment or engineer custom thermal systems, the competitive formula is consistent:

  1. Open ecosystems for rapid integration and IP protection
  2. Security-by-design for audit-ready operation
  3. Hybrid-energy readiness for decarbonization without compromising performance
  4. Virtualization for scalable features
  5. Lifecycle digital services that support recurring value

Open PLC and edge-centric platforms make this evolution practical. They enable U.S. OEMs to reuse proven code modules, expand capabilities quickly, and differentiate in a market driven by uptime, serviceability, and total cost of ownership. As the U.S. heat treat industry continues modernizing, the winners will be the OEMs combining intelligent control, secure connectivity, hybrid energy strategies, and software-defined flexibility — turning process heat equipment into resilient, future-ready performance systems.

About The Author:

Markus Kirk
Intl. Business Development Manager, Digitalization & Process Heat
Phoenix Contact

Markus Kick brings 25+ years of hands-on industrial expertise across process automation, thermal heat treatment systems, instrumentation, control engineering, and data-driven decision making. He is known for turning industrial digitalization trends into scalable, high-impact solutions that accelerate OEM innovation and deliver measurable value across global manufacturing environments.

For more information: Contact Markus Kirk at mkirk@phoenixcontact.com.

Sustainability Insights: Data-Driven Process Heat — Why Control Heat When You Can Optimize it? Read More »

Emissions Tool Tuned for Heat Treat Furnaces

A carbon emissions estimation tool specifically for heat treat furnaces combined physics-based furnace modeling with life cycle assessment. By revealing where emissions originate — from combustion and atmosphere gases to upstream energy sources — in this Technical Tuesday installment, Lakshmi Srinivasan and Fu Zhao, Ph.D., of Purdue University show how heat treaters can make data-driven decisions on efficiency improvements, electrification, and other decarbonization strategies.

This informative piece was first released in Heat Treat Today’s May 2026 Sustainable Heat Treat Technologies print edition.


Carbon Accountability in Heat Treatment

Heat treatment is a well-established, performance-critical step in metal component manufacturing. Today, as decarbonization pressures move up the manufacturing supply chain, the heat treat sector’s energy-intensive process heating faces scrutiny in industrial sustainability conversations.

Product carbon footprints, environmental product declarations, and life cycle assessments (LCA) have become more than just niche concerns for sustainability teams. Clients across automotive, renewable energy, and aerospace sectors are increasingly demanding process-specific, component-level emissions data that can be traced, verified, and compared. For heat treaters, that demand carries downstream accountability as carbon performance is becoming visible and increasingly factored into supply chain decisions. The requirement to measure and the pressure to decarbonize are converging.

Energy efficiency improvements, electrification, low-carbon fuel switching, and alternative furnace technologies are the principal pathways to reducing heat treat sector’s environmental footprint. Policy frameworks, client requirements, and voluntary net-zero commitments are pushing operators and OEMs alike to evaluate which of these investments deliver meaningful and cost-effective emission reductions.

Every heat treated part carries a carbon cost. Quantifying these emissions reliably and at the process level is imperative for informed decarbonization decision making.

Purdue’s Carbon Estimation Tool

Conventional carbon emissions accounting for industrial facilities relies on plant-level energy data, such as gas meter readings and utility bills, combined with standard emission factors. For legacy heat treating equipment, most instrumentation focuses on process control rather than energy or emissions measurement. These approaches produce estimates that are too rough to support product-level environmental impact or technology comparisons. Supply chain contributions of fuels, electricity, heat treat atmosphere gas generation, and furnace build need to be captured to characterize total emissions.

Standard LCA databases contain generic datasets for natural gas combustion and electricity generation but lack the data resolution needed to reflect heat treatment operations. Many associated process inputs, such as Endothermic atmosphere gas generation, have no dedicated LCA datasets.

Figure 1. Tool architecture diagram: inputs, modeling approach, outputs | Image Credit: PHTC

To address these gaps, a Python-based desktop GUI was developed that integrates physics-based furnace energy modeling with cradle-to-gate LCA (Srinivasan and Zhao 2025) (Figure 1). Cradle-to-gate assessment quantifies the environmental impact of a product or process across its entire supply chain, from raw material extraction through manufacturing, and follows the ISO 14040/14044 framework (International Organization for Standardization 2006a, 2006b).

Related: Srinivasan and Zhao previously introduced the broader framework behind carbon quantification in heat treating. Click on the image above to read more.

The furnace energy model performs a detailed thermal analysis of a radiant-tube batch atmosphere furnace, computing heat transfer, combustion efficiency, and energy balance throughout the heat treat cycle. The energy model is solved as a function of furnace geometry, insulation, load size and properties, heat treat temperature, fuel type, and combustion properties. The model considers natural gas-fired radiant tubes with different tube shapes, orientations (vertical/horizontal), and burner configurations, as well as electric heating. Resolved energy sinks include load and fixture heating, insulation thermal storage, insulation conduction losses to surrounding environment, furnace atmospheric gas heating, and electric heating or recuperator-dependent flue-gas losses.

The LCA takes the energy and material flows produced by the furnace model and traces each through the corresponding upstream supply chain, using custom-developed life cycle inventory data.

Tool Capabilities and Applications

The tool is designed to answer these questions: Where do emissions come from in a heat treat cycle? What drives them? What actions will reduce them most effectively?

What the tool computes:

  • Energy consumption per heat treat cycle, resolved by phase: heat-up, soak, diffusion
  • Full scope-resolved carbon footprint: Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions per cycle
  • Life cycle environmental impact metrics: global warming potential, smog formation related to NOx from burners, ecotoxicity, and particulate matter formation
  • Gas-fired vs. electric furnace emission performance under identical process conditions
  • Emissions sensitivity to key process and design parameters: operating temperature, furnace size and insulation, load density, preheating, and burner configuration

Where it can be applied:

  • Establishing a process-level emissions baseline for a specific furnace and recipe
  • Generating inventory data for product carbon footprints and environmental product declarations
  • Supporting Scope 1, 2, and 3 disclosures under GHG Protocol and EPA reporting frameworks
  • Evaluating electrification decisions against regional grid carbon intensity
  • Benchmarking emissions across competing furnace technologies for equivalent metallurgical outcomes

The sensitivity module enables operators and engineers to identify the dominant drivers of emissions and evaluate decarbonization options systematically. Burner configurations spanning non-recuperative, plug-in recuperative, and self-recuperative designs are evaluated through a combustion model that resolves chemical kinetics, tube temperatures, and emissions.

Heat distribution is computed on a per-surface basis using 3D Monte Carlo-based radiative view factors across the full furnace enclosure. Users can specify insulation material and thickness independently for each furnace wall, choosing from an extensive built-in material library.

Atmospheric gas contributions, such as Endothermic gas generation, nitrogen supply, and life-cycle amortized refractory materials, are included in the inventory.

Current model predictions are validated against instrumented industrial furnace data, with total cycle energy consumption within 5% of measured values from a well-maintained atmospheric furnace.

Emissions from a Carburizing Operation

Gas carburizing is selected to demonstrate tool results as a representative case for high-temperature, extended cycle time operations in preheated atmosphere-controlled industrial furnaces. The process requires a supply of externally generated Endothermic gas, which is an energy-intensive input with its own upstream footprint. What is true of carburizing in carbon accounting terms is broadly true of any thermochemical, atmosphere-controlled furnace process. The tool is built to accommodate the full range of heat treatment operations at various temperatures.

Figure 2. Carburization process flow diagram (data from PHTC)

The carburizing system boundary encompasses the batch atmosphere furnace and all associated energy and material inputs from heat-up, carbon boost, diffuse and equalize phases (Figure 2). Endothermic atmosphere gas generation is included within the boundary, covering both the heat demand of the generator retort and the natural gas consumed as a chemical reactant.

Tracing emissions from a carburizing operation requires a structured accounting framework: the sources are multiple, and each contributes differently to the total footprint.

  • Scope 1 covers direct emissions from on-site combustion: the natural gas burned in radiant tube burners and the Endothermic gas generator retort, plus spent atmosphere gas vented to the atmosphere at cycle end.
  • Scope 2 covers indirect emissions from purchased electricity consumed by heating elements, circulation fans, quenching systems, and attached auxiliary equipment.
  • Scope 3 captures everything upstream of the facility fence: the carbon embedded in the natural gas supply chain before it reaches the burner, the emissions associated with producing the Endothermic atmosphere gas, the embodied emissions in furnace construction and insulation materials, and the upstream footprint of nitrogen supply for purging and idling.

In a representative batch furnace carburizing cycle, direct natural gas combustion constitutes the dominant share of total greenhouse gas emissions (Figure 3).

Figure 3. Scope-resolved emission breakdown for a representative carburizing operation in a gas-fired atmospheric furnace | Image Credit: PHTC

However, a significant share of total emissions originates from sources beyond the furnace burner and what the gas meter captures. These fall under two distinct categories.

Endothermic atmosphere gas generation and usage are carbon intensive. This includes the heat demand of the generator retort, the natural gas consumed as a chemical reactant, the upstream Scope 3 emissions from the natural gas supply chain, and the burn-off of spent atmosphere gas at cycle end. That burn-off is a direct Scope 1 release: the principal constituents of Endothermic gas are CO and H2, both combustible. They are oxidized through a flame screen or exhaust stack as the inner chamber and vestibule door open between cycles.

Upstream supply chain emissions for furnace fuels and infrastructure constitute the second category. This includes the carbon embedded in natural gas extraction, processing, and pipeline delivery before it reaches the facility fence, plus the embodied carbon in furnace insulation and refractory materials amortized over the furnace lifetime.

Electric vs. Gas-Fired Carburizing? Depends on Where You Plug In

An electric furnace is modeled as a direct retrofit replacing gas burners with an electric heating setup. Existing tubes are repurposed as resistive heating elements, controlled by an SCR/variable reactance transformer (VRT). Furnace size, insulation, tube geometry, and carburizing operation remain unchanged, enabling a direct, like-for-like comparison between electric and natural gas atmospheric furnaces. The modeled energy analysis shows a reduction of slightly over 25% in total energy consumed to meet the same process heat demand. This is attributable to the elimination of flue gas exhaust losses inherent to combustion-based heating.

Energy efficiency, however, does not translate directly to carbon efficiency. Under current U.S. average grid conditions, the electric furnace produces about 20% more emissions than a natural gas furnace. The electricity carbon intensity is derived from Ecoinvent 3.12 life cycle emissions, which account for upstream contributions across the full electricity supply chain. This includes fuel extraction, power plant construction, transmission infrastructure, and distribution losses, making these the appropriate basis for ISO-compliant LCA.

A direct grid carbon intensity factor, such as eGRID 2023, captures only emissions at the point of generation (Figure 4). On this basis alone, the electric furnace produces approximately 6.5% more emissions per cycle than the gas-fired baseline.

Figure 4. Current eGRID electricity regions and grid mix | Image Credit: eGRID 2023

The carbon performance of an electric furnace is largely determined by the grid that powers it rather than by the heating equipment. In low-carbon grids such as CAMX (California), electrification delivers clear reductions. In coal- and gas-heavy regions such as MRO (Midwest Reliability Corporation) and RFC (Reliability First Corporation), electric furnaces produce emissions that exceed the gas-fired case by a considerable margin. National-average factors applied without regional context can produce directionally incorrect conclusions.

Expanding the Boundary: Furnace Idling and Quenching

Total greenhouse gas emissions increase by an average of 18% on expanding the system boundaries to account for integral quench operations and the nitrogen supply required for furnace purging and idling between cycles. Quenching is not thermally dominant, but the oil quench pump operates continuously, making it an electrically persistent load that accumulates over a production shift.

Nitrogen purging assumes five furnace volumes per cycle, and the associated emissions are highly source dependent. The carbon intensity of nitrogen supply varies significantly by delivery method. Cryogenic and compressed gas delivery systems have comparable and substantially higher upstream footprints than on-site alternatives. Liquefaction, compression, and transportation energy drive emissions from off-site nitrogen production. By contrast, on-site pressure swing adsorption produces nitrogen locally using only compression energy and carries roughly one-third of the emissions intensity of delivered alternatives.

For facilities operating continuous production schedules with frequent purge cycles, nitrogen source selection is a discrete decarbonization lever with a direct, quantifiable impact on total cycle emissions.

Conclusion

This tool provides a reliable, process-level method for the heat treat industry to engage with carbon emissions quantification. A complete LCA reveals that process heating accounts for two-thirds of total carburizing emissions in a natural gas-operated batch furnace. Endothermic gas and upstream supply chain emissions contribute to the rest. Matching furnace size to load is an immediately actionable and directly quantifiable decarbonization lever. The tool evaluates the emissions impact of electrification as a function of regional grid carbon intensity and accommodates a range of flexible batch furnace sizes and temperatures, quantifying each variable’s contribution to the total process carbon footprint.

About the Research: This research was conducted under the sponsorship of the Purdue Heat Treating Consortium. The computational tool and associated findings are available to current consortium members. For more details, please contact the authors.

References

International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 2006a. Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Principles and Framework. ISO 14040:2006. Geneva, Switzerland.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO). 2006b. Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Requirements and Guidelines. ISO 14044:2006. Geneva, Switzerland.

Srinivasan, L., and F. Zhao. 2025. “Quantifying Carbon Footprint in Industrial Heat Treatment Processes Through Life Cycle Assessment.” Proceedings of the ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference (MSEC 2025) 89022. https://doi.org/10.1115/MSEC2025-155425.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2023. “Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID).” https://www.epa.gov/egrid.

Wernet, G., C. Bauer, B. Steubing, J. Reinhard, E. Moreno-Ruiz, and B. Weidema. 2016. “The ecoinvent Database Version 3 (Part I): Overview and Methodology.” The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 21 (9): 1218–1230. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11367-016-1087-8.v

About the Authors:

Lakshmi Srinivasan
Ph.D. Candidate in Mechanical Engineering
Purdue University

Lakshmi Srinivasan is a Ph.D. candidate in Mechanical Engineering at Purdue University, specializing in life cycle assessment, energy modeling, and decarbonization pathways for industrial and transportation applications.

Fu Zhao, Ph.D.
Professor, School of Mechanical Engineering and the School of Sustainability Engineering and Environmental Engineering
Purdue University

Fu Zhao, Ph.D., is Professor in the School of Mechanical Engineering and the School of Sustainability Engineering and Environmental Engineering at Purdue University. His research integrates life cycle assessment, techno-economic analysis, recycling and circular economy strategies for critical materials and energy systems.

For more information: Contact Lakshmi Srinivasan at lsriniv@purdue.edu and Fu Zhao at fzhao@purdue.edu.

Emissions Tool Tuned for Heat Treat Furnaces Read More »

Heat Treat Radio #133: Process Qualification & Recipe Development in Vacuum Carburizing


Heat Treat Radio host Heather Falcone and guest Vincent Lelong, Senior Synergy Center Manager and Metallurgist at ECM USA, explore the realities of process qualification and recipe development in modern heat treating. Vincent shares decades of experience developing vacuum carburizing processes for automotive, aerospace, and high-volume manufacturing applications. Together, they discuss how heat treaters can balance metallurgy, fixturing, quench strategy, and production demands to achieve repeatable results. From practical troubleshooting insights to the evolution of vacuum carburizing technology, this conversation offers a grounded look at what it takes to optimize heat treating.

Below, you can watch the video, listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or read an edited transcript.




The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.

Introduction (00:05)

Heather Falcone: Hi, I’m Heather Falcone, and welcome to Heat Treat Radio. Today, we are asking a metallurgist, and we are talking about the ins and outs of process qualification and recipe development. We are on-site with the sponsor of our episode, ECM USA, in beautiful Pleasant Prairie, Wisconsin. It’s a real treat to be able to record on site. We hardly ever get that chance. Joining me today is Vincent Lelong, the Senior Synergy Center Manager and Metallurgist. Thanks for joining me today, Vincent.

Vincent Lelong: Thank you, Heather.

Heather Falcone: So you have the luxury, since we are in your beautiful facility, to tell me not just about yourself, but also about ECM. Start off with your background because it is extensive.

Vincent Lelong: I am a metallurgist, I went to college in France, and I started with ECM in 1999. Since then, I’ve been across the world in the U.S. for 20 years. I do presentation and testing for the furnace behind us and our larger furnace. I go on-site. This is our Synergy Center; it’s a nice environment, clean — quiet today because we’re filming.

Heather Falcone: Tell me a little bit about what ECM does.

Vincent Lelong: At ECM, we manufacture and install heat treatment vacuum furnaces. Our main focus is on low-pressure carburizing modular furnaces, large and small. We integrate not just heat treatment itself, but the pre-treatment, like washing, storage, preparation of the load with robots, heat treatment, temper, cryo… Everything is set up together, and that is our main goal: integration of a fully automatic installation.

Heather Falcone: A one-stop shop. You go to one place, and you’re going to make it all work.

Vincent Lelong: There’s a part and everything will be ready in few hours later, sometimes days, depending on the treatment.

Heather Falcone: Hopefully it all works.

ECM Nano vacuum furnace used for client cycle development and qualification.

Vincent Lelong: Well, it always works. It’s a really repeatable modular furnace. In the U.S., we are focusing on vacuum carburizing, but we also manufacture other types of furnaces for crystal growth, silicon heat treatment, melting silicon for solar panel, and others. Within ECM Group, there’s a range of heat treatment processes that we manufacture for. And not just steel; it can be other materials. I’m specialized in steel and very restricted heat treatment with vacuum carburizing, but maybe one day we can do other materials.

Heather Falcone: Steel makes the world run.

Vincent Lelong: With our modular furnace, we can do hardening, gas quench, oil quench, carburizing, gas quench, oil quench, and now we do vacuum carbonitriding and we can do nitriding in the furnace. So you can have one installation for multitask heat treatment. It’s the purpose of the modular furnace, the beauty of it.

Heather Falcone: More flexibility, more capabilities.

Biggest Challenges of Process Qualification and Recipe Development (4:08)

Heather Falcone: That brings us into the first core question that I want to ask, because when you’re evaluating bringing in another piece of equipment or if you’re trying to bring on a new process, it can be a little challenging. What do you see are the biggest pitfalls or what do you see people struggling with most when it comes to process qualification and recipe development?

Vincent Lelong: Most customers say, “I would like a good metallurgy. I would like mechanical properties.”

Heather Falcone: Right, make good parts. That’s number one.

Vincent Lelong: But you need to look at what kind of furnace you would like to use, as well as the size, the type of part, and the process. If you have a small part, do you want a bulk load? Do you want special fixtures because the main target is distortion-free? Everybody would like everything…

Heather Falcone: …distortion-free!

Vincent Lelong: Always. No problem. So, as a metallurgist, you need to think not just about heat treatment because you’ve been asked to heat treat a part. I could heat and quench in oil and say, “You have the metallurgy. My job is done.”

Heather Falcone: Right. It hit hardness.

Vincent Lelong: Exactly. Hardness, good. Vacuum carburizing, no oxidation. Good. How about the distortion? Okay, let’s speak about what we can do to reduce the power of the heat treatment itself. Then, let’s do a gas quench, but let’s work on fixtures also. It’s working with the supplier for fixtures and working with the customer with the machinists.

Sometimes, because we propose gas quench, people say, “Oh, gas quench means no distortion.” Well, the first step is to get the metallurgy right. If you need 20 bar gas quench, you might have some distortion. From experience, we know that the fixtures are also important. So we can work with the customer and supplier to propose the right fixtures and test the fixtures to target the best cooling rate and other properties.

But we also need to work with the machinists. If you have a challenging part, machinists may say, “It’s the fault of the metallurgist.” And the heat treater will say, “No, let’s work together at the table. We’ll sit, and we do the testing.” At the Synergy Center we have also the CMM, so we can measure before heat treatment and after heat treatment. It’s the best feeling when you bring not just the metallurgists together, but also the people who make the part. We work together to have the best of the best. It’s a lot of work, but we have years of experience, so we can reach the target faster than 20 years ago.

Technology has changed. As such, you also need to work with the steel manufacturer, the way the steel is made and the composition. Research has shown that if you improve the steel, you can reduce the quench pressure. If you need oil quench, then you already know that distortion will be potentially higher. If you need 20 bar, it’s one thing. Well, I did a presentation not long ago, and I found that the distortion with 10 bar or 20 bar in a Nano furnace was much better than in a larger load. For one part, that is. This might not be true if it’s other parts. There’s always that phrase in heat treatment, “that depends.” I don’t like this phrase.

Heather Falcone: It always depends.

Vincent Lelong: But it’s true, unfortunately. So, when you have worked all that together, you can bring the best analysis. I’m working before that to sell a furnace.

I need to choose whether it’s better for the customer to have a smaller furnace or a larger installation. That really depends on how many parts, the diversity of parts. If the customer has mostly small parts, the Nano may be the better choice. You have a faster answer because it’s in and out. You don’t need to buy so many fixtures. But if you have a larger part, a larger furnace is better. It’s not whether one furnace is better than the other. You need to choose which one will achieve your production target.

A customer in facility number A may need a larger furnace, but in facility B, there are other types of part, so that facility may need a smaller furnace. That’s how we work with the customer to target what is important.

Heather Falcone: Pick the right atmosphere, pick the right hot zone size, pick the right fixturing, raw material specs. All of those are going to influence how the runs going to go. I bet you have some stories about TCE from fixturing and eutectic and inadvertent bonding.

Vincent Lelong: I certainly have had a few mistakes in testing. I used a higher temperature because with vacuum carburizing we say we can go to a higher temperature. But then I used CFC fixtures at the wrong temperature!

Today however, the mixtures of fixtures can work and reduce the weight. As a metallurgist and a heat treater, I prefer to heat treat the part rather than the fixtures. When I see a customer running a load with almost more fixtures than parts, I’m asking, “What do you heat treat?” Are you losing money on heat treating fixtures more than parts?”

Heather Falcone: There is such a big weight differential between fixturing and the parts. How much lag time on your heat up and cool down are you wasting on having too much fixturing?

Vincent Lelong: It’s true.

Balancing Technical Requirements with Production (11:30)

Heather Falcone: Once you’re in recipe development, how do you balance technical requirements, the repeatability, and the realities of production?

Vincent Lelong: Repeatability is firstly about how you design the load. Then you need to know the quantity of parts. You also may know the surface of your load, but it may always be necessary, I will say. Most of the time we don’t know that and it still runs correctly.

Heather Falcone: Still a black box. It’s an art what we do.

Vincent Lelong: Technically, it’s a good thing because when we put something inside the furnace, it’s coming back, and we don’t see much difference. But the mechanical properties are completely different, so it is kind of like magic.

So you define your load, you define your heating time to get temperature, and when you’re sure you’re at temperature, you start to carburize. I will speak about vacuum carburizing. First, we have software for the carburizing boost and diffusion; you input your parameters and then you have your recipe. You can run it generic, or you can go into detail and improve it. But as built, the software will give you some set parameters and will work.

Heather Falcone: Technology is so cool.

Vincent Lelong: It’s getting better and better. You will also need to select the type of furnace. When you have one part, it’s not the same as when you have 3,000 parts. The density of the load will influence your gas flow and the capacity of your installation.

Most of our larger furnaces have a maximum of acetylene of 4,000 liters. But you can play with the gas and the duration of the boost and diffusion so it goes inside the part; when you have a blind hole or you need 3 millimeters, you carburize. (Acetylene is beautiful, but molecules can go everywhere, sometimes where we don’t want acetylene, which is why we have the stop off.) But you define your load, you define your recipe, your gas flow, and then you run a test and analyze the metallurgy. If it’s good, then you’re done and you don’t move from that.

Heather Falcone: That’s what production wants to hear.

Vincent Lelong: When you are a heat treater, you may receive 10 parts to heat treat. Tomorrow you may receive 20 parts, and maybe you need to run the same recipe. In general, you can run the same recipe for 10 parts or 20 parts. You would use the parameters of the larger load for the smaller, if possible. The result will be mostly the same, but the cost will not be the same.

This is where you can optimize your recipe for different types of load, like half of the load versus a full load. You can change the flow of gas, and then reduce your heating time because why set for two hours when in one hour, it is at temperature. One hour is money.

Heather Falcone: Got to turn and burn.

Vincent Lelong: This is also where you define your database and your repeatability. I once had a customer that had me create a recipe for a specific quantity of parts and a design of load. A few years later, that customer called and said, “It doesn’t work.” With modern heat treating controls, we record everything, so you have a database, the curves, and you can go back and see what was wrong.

Heather Falcone: Right. What changed?

Vincent Lelong: In this case, I discovered the customer was running the double quantity of parts in the same load without changing the recipe at all.

Heather Falcone: Makes sense. Start there.

Vincent Lelong: Heating time was not long enough. Gas flow was not long enough. And they were not working at the right pressure in the furnace, so failure occurred. I said, “Change that.” No news is good news usually. If the customer doesn’t call you, it’s because…

Heather Falcone: …Everything works.

Vincent Lelong: That’s the beauty of this furnace.

With repeatability, you always need to look at the curves. If you have an issue of temperature out of the range, there will be an alarm. So, you can check if the part is good without checking the metallurgy. If you heat treat a big part, usually you won’t cut the part. If you have six parts in a load or 10, you have samples. You have to validate your sample and your real part at the beginning.

Heather Falcone: To make sure it’s representative.

Vincent Lelong: Exactly, or if there are differences because you cannot find exactly the same material, you know the difference, and the difference would be always the same.

Heather Falcone: Right. Make it predictable.

Vincent Lelong: We have some customers that would check one load per day or per shift and not every load. If you have 3,000 parts in a load, you can check a part. When you have six parts, you will likely not cut a part. If the furnace tells you it’s good, why check? When you check repeatability, you still need a lab. Not checking the metallurgy is difficult. You should always check again. Repeatability shouldn’t be left to chance or statistics. Take a part and check. Is it good? Then continue.

Heather Falcone: That’s kind of the target of qualification, right? To get those parameters that you predefined.

Vincent Lelong: In time you need to be sure nothing changes.

Heather Falcone: What does re-qualifying look like?

Vincent Lelong: You want to be sure that nothing changes, material-wise. Sometimes, you run the same material, and you achieve 35 HRC. But at one point in time, you achieved only 25 HRC. This is the same material on the paper, but something has happened. So you need to go back in time and figure out what was originally going on. Is it the heat treatment? Is the installation of something around it?

Heather Falcone: Use all the data that’s available to you.

Vincent Lelong: This is where you check the productivity.

Quench Media (19:20)

Heather Falcone: How about the quench media?

Vincent Lelong: When you develop a recipe, if you do oil quenching you will always do austenitizing. You don’t want a crack. You will carburize, austenitize, and go to oil quench. It’s pretty easy to switch from atmosphere oil quench to vacuum oil quench because technically the recipe is pretty much the same, and we’re going to cover that ground extensively because I know it’s kind of scary to even consider that possibility.

When you go with gas quench, if you don’t know the target or are unsure, you select 20 bar.

Heather Falcone: Sure, 20 bar. That’s the easiest in the world.

Vincent Lelong: Exactly. You do 20 bar and you get what you get. There is an advantage of the gas quench. Many customers will ask, “Do I need to do a direct quench? Do I need to do austenitizing?” Most of the time we say direct quench, and we found that you don’t crack with gas quench. Whatever the pressure, we never really have much cracking. Or a customer may ask, “Will the part break due to the gas quench?” That will never happen. I once asked the competition if they ever saw a crack with gas quenching and they said no. It’s the way the gas quench quenches and cools the part down, then it’s less powerful than the liquid, so you don’t have this potential issue.

But if you don’t know, you stay at 20 bar. If you would like to optimize, you can reduce, but you need to achieve the target metallurgy.

Heather Falcone: Right. You’ve got to get your core hardness.

Vincent Lelong: Your limit is when your metallurgy is not right. When you reduce, you reduce the cost. If you reduce the pressure and the speed, you will reduce the distortion potential.

Heather Falcone: Which is always a good thing.

Vincent Lelong: If you have a shaft, you should not place it horizontal, because whenever you quench that, it will not be straight.

Heather Falcone: We’ve potato chipped a few parts over the years, yes.

Vincent Lelong: Me too. I have tried horizontal in some cases. It’s interesting, but you need more support. I think it’s possible, but nobody wants to try it.

Heather Falcone: Why bother?

Vincent Lelong: Vertical is easier.

Heather Falcone: If you’re qualifying, just make the fixture that’s going to support it.

Vincent Lelong: Yes. Why should I change? It’s always a big question; we just quench it vertically this way. We do it this way. Now for gears, in heat treat sites I see a lot of vertical positions for gears strung on a rod. As an operator, I don’t like that.

Heather Falcone: Tell me why.

Vincent Lelong: Because it’s heavy. We already have difficulty finding operators in heat treatment. If it’s heavy, nobody wants to do it.

From a robotic point of view, it’s more difficult, too. Today, with most vacuum carburized and gas quenched gears are heat treated horizontally on fixtures and most of the time with offset position. That will give you the best metallurgy, but also the least distortion overall. Vertically for machinists, it’s very difficult to re-machine something round to oval. When you place it horizontally, you can do potato chips but machinists can grind and reshape the part easily, if it’s possible.

Heather Falcone: If you’re already near net, it’s going to be a different story.

Vincent Lelong: Exactly. That’s where when you check your distortion and repeatability of process — it’s the fixtures.

Heather Falcone: I would think working with the customer as much as you can to see if material can be left on the part too, if we do need to have grinding, if we do need to have repair or recovery for any possible distortion.

Vincent Lelong: So, let’s say we are working on a six-speed. For the six-speed, everybody wants to vacuum carburizing gas quench. The objective: zero distortion, heat treat, and assemble.

Heather Falcone: In theory.

Vincent Lelong: No, in truth.

Heather Falcone: Really? Okay.

Vincent Lelong: That was the target.

Heather Falcone: Ambitious, I like it.

Vincent Lelong: Yes, but when you have a new product, you can use new technology, you can work on the fixtures, you can work on everything. We worked a lot with car manufacturers to do the best heat treatment, the best fixtures, the maximum of parts, of course, and repeatability. This furnace is running millions of parts.

That is why we know vacuum carburizing works and it’s repeatable. For this high volume, we had to work on zero distortion. But the specification then didn’t change, metallurgically speaking. Most of the time it was 0.3 to 0.7 millimeters. It’s a large gap. No problem. Then we went to the 10-speed for most of the automotive, and then the distortion was the target because of the experience we gained with the six-speed, which was the noise. People don’t want the noise. Today, with the 10-speed, we start to grind at 0.1 millimeter.

You have to compensate for your carburizing process so that it is longer and deeper, but also most customers will reduce the metallurgical requirements. From 0.3 to 0.7, they want 0.5 plus or minus 0.05, which is much thinner. With electrical applications today, you want zero noise, because you can hear everything. There’s a lot of grinding, and when I say a lot, I mean exact, 0.2 millimeter.

Heather Falcone: That is a lot of post-process work.

Vincent Lelong: You have the perfect teeth. You need to anticipate longer carburizing, and it’s great! Also, what I see with metallurgy, it’s not that you don’t have a general metallurgical specification, but each area of a part will have its own metallurgy. That means you have the pitch of the gear, the roots, a minimum, but sometimes you have a specification of the tip.

A customer may specify, “I don’t want more than 0.8.”

Heather Falcone: Just for that area.

Vincent Lelong: Yes. As the parts get more and more complex, they have more than just one application or function. You have the spline. You have double teeth. Each one will have its own requirement. With an atmospheric furnace, to get that, it doesn’t work very well. But with vacuum carburizing, you can achieve very precise requirements.

Switching from Atmospheric to Vacuum Carburizing (28:11)

Heather Falcone: To that point, is that one of the things that stops people from considering the change from atmospheric to vacuum carburizing, or is it part complexity?

Considering the switch? See how different carburizing technologies and furnace features stack up when you click on the image above.

Vincent Lelong: The larger companies do not seem to be afraid, because they know what they want and they already have experience. For the heat treaters, the smaller companies, it’s very difficult to switch with the requirements today. When you see the requirement on the drawing, it’s funny because before there was just heat treatment.

Heather Falcone: Yeah, it’s on this process sheet.

Vincent Lelong: One line. Surface condition, effective case depth, core hardness.

Heather Falcone: Right.

Vincent Lelong: Today there are different requirements, and there are several requirements: before heat treatment, after, and final. You know how much you need to take off, and not every area you take off. You said keep more material. The advantage of that is more material, less distortion. But you will have to carburize more.

Heather Falcone: Ultimately it may be more expensive for everybody.

Vincent Lelong: Exactly. The machining behind the grinding is also costly. When we develop a recipe, we have the customer machine to the final dimension, do the heat treatment, and then we will see where we are in terms of metallurgy and distortion. If we are not where we need to be, don’t take off too much. Then you adjust.

One other story is about a thread.

Heather Falcone: Oh, God, threads. The bane of every heat treater’s existence, threads.

Vincent Lelong: I get a lot of questions about threads. Do I need to make them before heat treatment? Do I need to put a mask on, paint, or make the fixture?

Heather Falcone: Fixture or mechanical.

Vincent Lelong: Or to not do them and do them after?

Heather Falcone: That is also expensive.

Vincent Lelong: Yes, also expensive; but I think it could be a robotic application.

Heather Falcone: Oh true. Very good point.

Vincent Lelong: It’s the way I would go.

Heather Falcone: How interesting.

Vincent Lelong: To not do the thread before.

Heather Falcone: Lower risk.

Vincent Lelong: First, when you carburize, you can create a brittleness of the thread. But also operator movement of the thread from crate to the fixtures can cause damage to the thread. What do you do? Can you save the thread after heat treatment? Not always. Then that is garbage. You had to manufacture the part, heat treat the part, just to put in the garbage, which is a cost.

Heather Falcone: Probably 80 or 90% of your whole cost, gone in an instant.

Vincent Lelong: In my opinion, you could have a robot preparing the load. You would have a robot take off, and every time it’s the same movement. Then, thread or not, it’s easier.

Heather Falcone: More predictable.

Vincent Lelong: Then the robot, if you don’t do the thread, can put the shaft, usually it’s a shaft with a right connection on the thread on the end, put to a little induction machine, reheat, and then put in a crate and go back to machining. Then it’s all done.

In that instance, I think it’s my preference not to do the thread first. I have customers who ask me for paint or for a mask. Paint is not, I would say, 100% safe. You need a specialist to put on the paint. There are some tricks, as I know heat treaters know. They have been doing this for years and they know their stuff.

Heather Falcone: That’s their secret.

Vincent Lelong: I think heat treaters have more secrets about painting and protection of the part than the big companies do. They know it better.

Heather Falcone: Their lives are on the line. That’s all they do, so they have to make it perfect.

Vincent Lelong: You can learn a lot from heat treaters. They know their work.

Heather Falcone: That’s what I always recommend to the captives. Get out to as many heat treat shops as you can, because it’s going to make your in-house heat treat better.

Vincent Lelong: They have years of experience to learn from. Heat treatment is tricks after tricks. Some customers are afraid to go to in-house heat treatment. These heat treaters hold a variety of information that is helpful for these customers.

Heather Falcone: It’s an interesting point that you brought up about being afraid, because vacuum carburizing has gotten that reputation over the years that it’s difficult. It’s tough to figure out.

Vincent Lelong: Because we did a good job. We did a good job to say you can optimize. In reality, if you understand what you want to heat treat, the carburizing process is all made by software. Every company has their own software. So it is pretty simple, and though it can still be scary for the heat treater.

Heather Falcone: Process change is scary.

Vincent Lelong: There are some companies that develop vacuum carburizing software where you need to know everything about the steel, the chemistry, all the parameters. We work with carbon. For our software, you enter the carbon content originally, roughly the temperature you would like to heat treat, and what you would like on the final. The software will give you something, and it will be 95% of what you’re looking for.

Now you need to quench. Like I said, with oil quenching, it’s no problem. Gas quenching, 20 bar, no problem, very easy and straightforward. Optimization can be where it’s trickier. But it’s just like an atmospheric furnace. I work with atmospheric furnaces, and they all have their cheat sheets.

You need carbon potential, temperature, time, and in vacuum carburizing, it’s the same thing. The temperature, your carbon potential, or what you expect for carbon, the time, the case depth you would like to achieve, and here is your process.

Heather Falcone: Then you don’t need the cheat sheet. It’s gone. Then it’s documented and repeatable.

Vincent Lelong: Right, then you have to heat up and quench. So, straight heat treatment: heat it up to be sure you’re at temperature, then carburize, and you quench.

Heather Falcone: One test?

Vincent Lelong: Yes, I often do just one test.

Customers may ask me to do a test for a Flex system, a larger system. I do it here at the Synergy Center first because it’s cheaper for me because it just value add and it’s here. I can mix a different part, different design, and run. “Oh, it’s a 8620? No problem.” Usually, it’s good.

For a Nano load, it’s like a one-fifth or it’s a one fixture and the bigger load, it’s like two column of fixtures, then you stack. So, it’s not much different. You start on a smaller scale and you go bigger, and you just add a little heat up time.

And if you ask me, “What do you need?” Put everything to the maximum!! (We are here to sell you a spare part, so, you know.) But really, if you put everything to the maximum you will be good. Maybe too good, and you might have a more maintenance, but we’d be able to provide a quote to reduce the maintenance. (*joking laughter*) 

Closing Thoughts (37:36)

Heather Falcone: As we finish up, if there’s one thing that you’d want our listeners to take away, rethinking about their approach to process qualification and recipe development, what do you want them to know?

Vincent Lelong: It’s not difficult. It’s like every other heat treatment; you have to test it and you will quickly see that it’s easy. At ECM USA, we provide training and testing to show you what can be achieved and answer your questions. If you’re worried, we will show you how easy it is, how clean it is. There’s no flame. If you have oil quench, there’s no flame because everything is protected. So it’s not difficult, it’s just one step. Do not be afraid.

Heather Falcone: Take that first step, and explore the process.

Vincent Lelong: I think there’s enough research and evidence in the last 25 years in the U.S., especially with large automotive and aerospace companies to know that it’s not a big deal. Most people — in heat treating or not — don’t like change.

Heather Falcone: But they can partner with you, Vincent, who has decades of experience. Reach out to ECM. Get in touch. Start exploring.

Vincent Lelong: The funny thing is, with decades of experience, what we are capable of heat treating 20 years ago we can do way better now. The technology is better. Gas quenching is made to quench, not to cool. It’s quenching. It’s hard. It’s almost as hard of a quench as an oil quench. You can do bulk load carburizing. I did carbonitriding in bulk load not that long ago. If you had asked me to do that 20 years ago, I would say, “No way that works.” But today that works. Just contact us.

Heather Falcone: Start the conversation, right?

Vincent Lelong: And I would be happy to show you. I like my job.

Heather Falcone: You love your job. I’m going to say it. You’re very passionate.

Vincent Lelong: I like testing because it’s a challenge every day. It’s pushing the limit. It’s like a movie. Is it possible? If you follow the book or internet, they will say no. I would say, “Let’s try.” I’m testing on materials other than steel as well that I would not have expected to work. Modular furnaces can be a very versatile.

Heather Falcone: Well it sounds like production is getting ready to get things done. Thanks so much, Vincent. It was great spending time with you.


About the Guest

Vincent Lelong
Synergy Center Manager / Sr. Metallurgist
ECM USA, INC.

Vincent Lelong, ECM USA Synergy Center Manager, transferred to ECM USA in 2005 to manage the North American Testing Program in Wisconsin after 6 years’ experience with production/testing furnaces at ECM Technologies headquarters in Grenoble, France. Vincent has degrees in Chemistry & Physics from the University of Reims, and Treatment of Materials (specializing in Heat Treatment) from BTS Roosevelt, also located in Reims, France. He began his career as a production and laboratory technician for a commercial heat treater, and joined the ECM Group in 1999 as an ECM Technician running LPC testing/metallurgical analysis within ECM vacuum furnace systems.

For more information: Contact Vincent Lelong at vincentlelong@ecm-usa.com.

Heat Treat Radio #133: Process Qualification & Recipe Development in Vacuum Carburizing Read More »