OP-ED

Flame and Fire: Fuel Sources and Bedposts

/ BURNERS & COMBUSTION SYSTEMS TECHNICAL CONTENT, Manufacturing Heat Treat Technical Content, OP-ED

In this Technical Tuesday installment, Jim Roberts of U.S. Ignition entertains readers in a Combustion Corner editorial about how fuel sources became more affordable over time and aspects of combustion burner design. Stick around for his side story on the “innovative” use of bedposts.

This editorial was first released in Heat Treat Today’s October 2025 Ferrous/Nonferrous print edition.

A furnace guy walks into a heat treat facility and sees burners everywhere. Furnace guy says to the faces in the room, “Why did you pick those types of burners?” Thinking this is a trick question, the heat treaters respond, cautiously, “To make things hot?” Of course, they are correct, because making fire and heat is the name of the game, right?

But as we have considered burner styles, designs, flame shapes, and air delivery types with our last couple of Combustion Corner columns, I suspect there was a good deal more analysis given to the selection of burners.

To appreciate the history of burner design, “furnace guy” should realize why burners evolved in the first place: fuel source. When the first burners were starting to be used on box furnaces, they used oil, kerosene, and fuel that had to be pumped. Over the years, many different fuels have been used. Yet, we have a tendency to think of gaseous fuels as the only option for burner performance.

Bedpost Burners

I recall the first time I got called into a facility to try and improve the performance of the furnaces (yep, I truly am a furnace/burner guy). It was a big box furnace that could handle 3-ton quench and temper loads. At that point, I was unaware of the multiple types of burners that were out in the market.

The owner of the shop opened the furnace door for me to see the combustion system. I stared. Sticking into the walls of this big box furnace were bedposts. These “burners” were purchased at 50¢ a post from some hotel auction, and they had about 50 spare posts to boot.

Grinder slots had been cut into the top of these posts. Refractory had been mudded into the mounting blocks to protect the fuel feed, which was being forced, or should I say blown, in through the bed posts and atomized by the pressure of being squeezed through these slots in the knob at the top of the posts!

The fuel? Diesel fuel. Regular, old, out-of-the-pump diesel fuel. Or kerosene, for that matter. I was told the system could also use fire pulverized coal, sucked into the bedpost by pitot feeds of compressed air. They lit the burners with burning oily rags tossed into the chamber and quickly opened the valves controlling the fuel.

I was there to sell new modern high-efficiency gas burners.

I declared that this was antiquated, unsafe, archaic, dirty, and said about a thousand other denigrating comments.

The owner of this heat treat said, “Yep, it’s all those things, and more!” He continued, “It’s also reliable, simple, and predictable.” He mused, “I suppose that that thing hasn’t really broken down or shut off in the 25 years since we built it!”

I’m a fairly quick study and surmised that I was not going to make this sale. Duh! This furnace had everything they needed. And the gas system I was going to propose was going to be expensive.

A Burgeoning Gas Industry and Our Next Column

That furnace was still running when I made a move to another city some 10 or so years later.

Eventually, the gas industry that cropped up made fuel cheap…and I mean cheap. I thought, “I bet that guy and his accursed bedpost burners will talk to me now!” So, I went back, and that fella said, “Yeah, we got out of the business that used that old process and moved on. We’d be glad to talk about modernization.” And we did.

That same outfit that operated bedposts for burners for 50 years became a vanguard for modern efficiency and process improvement.

Natural gas as a fuel source is quite modern. Nowadays, that is essentially the truth: natural gas and sometimes other gaseous equivalents tend to be the most widely used fuels in the industrial world.

When looking at the rapid developments of burner configurations and why they developed, it is best first to understand some of the history of these developments. See you in the next installment to talk about the history of the industrial gas industry.

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.

Flame and Fire: Fuel Sources and Bedposts Read More »

Heat Treat Humor: Heat Treatment For Your Funny Bone

/ OP-ED

Get your kicks out of today’s edition of Heat Treat Humor, featuring jokes from Publisher Doug Glenn, Heat Treat Today editors, and contributions from around the industry.

If you have a heat treatment joke to share please forward it along for the humor enthusiasts here at Heat Treat Today by emailing editor@heattreattoday.com. It may just end up being featured!

1. Why did the steel need therapy after quenching? It had too much unresolved stress. 

Which happens to any of us when we’re not treated right.

2. Why don’t metals gossip during annealing? They’re too busy relaxing.

Cue the shamisen music.

3. What did the furnace say to the cold titanium? You need to warm up to change.

The titanium felt it’d be hardened by the experience.

4. Why did the aluminum fail its heat treatment exam? It lost its temper under pressure.

Don’t be like aluminum.

5. What’s a heat treater’s favorite genre of music? Heavy metal.

And their favorite band? Metallica.

6. Heat treatment impacts almost every faucet of our lives.

It’s far reaching.

7. Why did Heat Treat Joe burn out in his job? He didn’t take enough time for stress-relief.

A mistake any of us can make.

8. Why did the metal fail its quenching process? Because it wasn’t all it was cracked up to be.

We and metal have that in common.

9. What kind of worship does a heat treater like? Metalliturgical.

Honey for lovers of the refiner’s fire.

10. Why did the knife adjust so easily to marriage? It had tempered expectations.

And that’s a wrap!

Find heat treating products and services when you search on Heat Treat Buyers Guide.Com

Heat Treat Humor: Heat Treatment For Your Funny Bone Read More »

The Future Is Coming Three Times Faster Than You Think

/ BURNERS & COMBUSTION SYSTEMS TECHNICAL CONTENT, GUEST COLUMN, MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT TECH, OP-ED

In this Technical Tuesday installment featuring Combustion Corner by Jim Roberts, president of U.S. Ignition, readers are enlightened about how upcoming policies might impact their burner systems, fuel mixtures, and equipment. Could certain policies impact technical requirements of heat treating? Find out more below.

This informative piece was first released in Heat Treat Today’s July 2025 Super Brands print edition.

A furnace guy goes into a bar and says, “This looks like a fast crowd… and all the players nod in agreement.”

Where are we? It’s the future! And in heat treating and combustion circles, the changes that will occur in the next several years will be very impactful to our industry. We’ve all heard these things, and we have some of the very best experts in the world working for us in this industry to make sure that we continue to grow and to be a leader in the legislation and rules that could cripple the wonderful world of heat treating and metals.

We are lucky to have industry associates at the Metal Treating Institute (MTI) who understand the impact of some of these new regulations. In this year’s Air & Atmosphere issue of Heat Treat Today magazine, Michael Mouilleseaux (Erie Steel LTD) provided updates on the proposed decarbonization initiatives. I have seen presentations by Michael and his committee composed of Heather Falcone (Cook Induction Heating Company) and Ben Gasbarre (Gasbarre Thermal Processing Systems). This is critical knowledge for us all, and we should be staying as vigilant and supportive as we can. Michael’s interview is a must-read in that February issue – if you missed it, go back and read it. Please.

And then you say, “What’s this got to do with combustion equipment and the stuff that this Roberts guy is normally talking about?”

Well, not only does the decarbonization mandate mean the possibility of costs through government burdens and penalties, but the equipment and process change requirements are going to be staggering if we don’t prepare.

As long as I’m in a name-dropping mood, I’m going to mention Brian Kelly of Honeywell. Brian is a degreed aerospace engineer, and yet he decided to come play in the mud with us furnace guys for a career. Brian has several detailed presentations online about some of the prime initiatives for all the combustion equipment companies — hydrogen Combustion. Yep, the “H” word. The holy grail of zero pollution. One of those presentations includes fascinating detailed data on hydrogen and other emission initiatives, given by Brian Kelly and Todd Ellerton on YouTube regarding future combustion technology requirements.

“So, what does the “three times faster” thing mean, Jim?”

Well, all major combustion equipment companies, like Honeywell, understand that hydrogen requires three times the amount of fuel to generate the same amount of available heat as natural gas. Hydrogen also burns with seven to eight times the “flame speed” of natural gas. It burns, on average, about 400 degrees hotter (F) than natural gas. And so, from an engineering standpoint, there are a fantastic number of variations that must be considered as we look forward, especially when addressing CO₂ and other emissions. Add propane, butane, methane, producer gas, landfill gas, and anything else that is presently being utilized in the heat treat circles, and that provides a lot of possible variations!

Now, it needs to be said that a good many burners can burn hydrogen already. The anticipation of this level of scientific and ecological requirements was seen a long time ago. Conversely, many cannot. Brian Kelly explains that 17% of the present pre-mix/blended fuel systems cannot utilize this fuel. It also bears mentioning that there are three different grades of hydrogen production levels.

So, let’s start doing the math on how many iterations it will take. But here is the biggest tidbit of hydrogen science in the combustion world – hydrogen is the smallest molecule and the lightest in a molecular sense. Helium is smaller and lighter, for fact-checker purposes, but we aren’t trying to burn helium, are we? So, as we blend hydrogen with our other fuels (i.e., the most practical way to maintain some of the infrastructure and equipment), we need to have our combination equipment suppliers test and verify that which exists will work.

Obviously, if it takes three times the fuel volume, existing gas delivery lines will be an issue. At the molecular level, smaller and lighter means that many existing seals, connections, and control valves may no longer be gas-tight and may leak. That’s not good! If the flame speed of these fuels is five to eight times that of existing fuels, temperature profiles within the process will need to be reviewed and re-calibrated. And if it burns 400 to 500 degrees hotter, certainly that will require a review of the former materials of construction.

So, how does this tie into the original theme of “The future is coming fast?” Well, we have just touched briefly on one possible fuel transition that is on the horizon. Carbon points/credits are already being taxed in Europe. We can bet that these global decarbonization efforts will be moving ahead. We will need a review so that a “head in the sand” mentality does not catch any of us in the thermal processing community flatfooted and ill-prepared.

It’s easy to think that it won’t affect you. When I mentioned “three times as fast,” of course, I was alluding to the fuel references, and the best way to be prepared for the future is to see it coming. Be alert and stay current, and we will adapt as an industry, as we have so many times before. Until 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.

Find heat treating products and services when you search on Heat Treat Buyers Guide.Com

The Future Is Coming Three Times Faster Than You Think Read More »

Cybersecurity Desk: Most SMBs Unprepared for CMMC 2.0, Risk Losing Contracts 

/ CYBERSECURITY, OP-ED

Despite an increasing cyber threat landscape, many small to mid-sized businesses (SMBs) in the Department of Defense (DoD) supply chain remain unprepared for compliance with NIST SP 800-171 R2 and CMMC 2.0. The Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) 2.0 aims to improve cybersecurity across the defense industrial base (DIB), but many SMBs struggle to meet the standards, putting them at risk of losing crucial contracts. Surveys suggest that nearly 70% of SMBs are unready for the new requirements, and the real figure could be even higher due to some businesses inaccurately reporting compliance by inflating their assessment scores. 

This is the final installment of the Cybersecurity Column penned by Joe Coleman of Bluestreak Compliance (August 6, 1968 — April 1, 2025). Joe was as kind as he was committed to helping manufacturers understand and meet cybersecurity compliance standards. This column series was born from his genuine desire to walk alongside others as they navigated the complexities of regulation and risk. We honor his memory and are grateful for the time, insight, and encouragement he shared with our readers.

Understanding CMMC 2.0 

CMMC 2.0 simplifies the original five-tier framework into three levels: 

  • Level 1: Basic cyber hygiene for contractors handling Federal Contract Information (FCI) 
  • Level 2: Advanced practices for those working with Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) 
  • Level 3: Stringent requirements for contractors involved in national security projects 

Compliance is mandatory for any contractor bidding on DoD contracts, including those working indirectly for federal contractors and subcontractors. SMBs should anticipate clients to inquire about their compliance as these standards will soon impact their business relationships. Achieving compliance is a lengthy process, typically taking twelve to eighteen months. 

Low Readiness and Risks 

The lack of readiness among SMBs threatens both business continuity and national security. Many smaller contractors lack the resources and expertise to meet CMMC 2.0’s standards. Given the defense sector’s reliance on a wide variety of contractors, this gap could create widespread repercussions. 

Financial Implications of Non-Compliance 

Compliance with CMMC 2.0 can be financially burdensome. Implementing measures such as multi-factor authentication, encryption, and continuous monitoring can be costly, especially for businesses with limited resources. The lack of in-house cybersecurity expertise compounds this issue, requiring companies to hire or train specialized personnel, further increasing costs. 

Failing to comply with CMMC 2.0 could result in losing valuable DoD contracts, which can be a significant portion of SMB revenue. Such losses could lead to layoffs, revenue declines, or even business closures. 

Challenges to Compliance 

Several challenges contribute to the widespread unpreparedness among SMBs: 

Challenges To Compliance
Source: CanvaPro
  • Complexity of requirements: While CMMC 2.0 simplifies the original framework, its specific requirements remain difficult to interpret for many SMBs, particularly in identifying necessary security measures. 
  • Resource limitations: The cost of achieving and maintaining compliance strains smaller businesses, which often lack the budgets for the required technology and expertise. 
  • Lack of cybersecurity expertise: A shortage of qualified personnel poses a significant obstacle, as demand for cybersecurity professionals is high across industries. 
  • Unclear timelines: Uncertainty surrounding DoD’s compliance timelines complicates planning and prioritization for SMBs. 

Government Support Initiatives 

To help SMBs, the DoD has introduced various programs, including training, grants, and educational resources. A phased implementation timeline also provides additional preparation time. However, industry experts suggest that further support, such as tax credits or subsidies, could help SMBs offset the costs of compliance. Clearer guidance from the DoD would also be beneficial in helping businesses navigate the certification process. 

Path Forward for SMBs 

To secure future contracts, SMBs must prioritize cybersecurity. This involves conducting internal risk assessments, identifying vulnerabilities, and creating compliance plans. Partnering with cybersecurity experts or managed service providers can help SMBs develop cost-effective strategies. Additionally, leveraging government resources and adopting critical security measures early will better position SMBs for CMMC 2.0 certification. 

Conclusion 

The widespread lack of preparedness for CMMC 2.0 poses significant risks to both SMBs and the defense supply chain. As deadlines approach, proactive measures from both businesses and the government are necessary to close the readiness gap and ensure the continued participation of SMBs in the defense sector. 

About the Author:

Joe Coleman
Cyber Security Officer
Bluestreak Consulting
Source: Bluestreak Consulting

Joe Coleman was the cybersecurity officer at Bluestreak Compliance, which is a division of Bluestreak | Bright AM™. Joe worked for over 35 years in diverse manufacturing and engineering positions. His background included extensive training in cybersecurity, a career as a machinist, machining manager, and an early additive manufacturing (AM) pioneer. Joe presented at the Furnaces North America (FNA 2024) convention on DFARS, NIST 800-171, and CMMC 2.0.

Find heat treating products and services when you search on Heat Treat Buyers Guide.Com

Cybersecurity Desk: Most SMBs Unprepared for CMMC 2.0, Risk Losing Contracts  Read More »

Time for Company Leaders To Refocus on Profits

/ OP-ED, PUBLISHER'S PAGE

Heat Treat Today publishes twelve print magazines a year and included in each is a letter from the publisher, Doug Glenn. This letter first appeared in March 2025 Aerospace Heat Treating print edition.

Feel free to contact Doug at doug@heattreattoday.com if you have a question or comment. 

The world is a better place when people know what their job is and then stick to that job. When the carpenter knows that their job is working with wood and then works with wood, things go well. When the pipefitter doesn’t try to be an electrician but sticks to pipefitting, things go well. It’s only when we forget (or never knew) who we are or why we’re here that things begin to go terribly wrong.

This is just as true in the C-suite as it is on the shop floor when it comes to running a business. CEO, CFO, COO, presidents, and VPs all benefit the business by sticking to their huckleberry bush just as the welder, the electrician, and the plant operations guys prosper the business when they do what they’re called to do.

In the C-suites, however, there seems to be more confusion about what it is they are there to do and company leaders more frequently get distracted from their huckleberry bush than do the guys in the shop. Here are some good, yet ultimately unhelpful things that have kept company leadership from focusing on profits — which ought to be their huckleberry bush.

Environmental Concerns

If ever there was a worthy cause, caring for the planet should be toward the top of the list, coming in second only behind caring for people. Business leaders proceed at their own risk if they completely ignore environmental issues. But elevating “saving the planet” over profits is a common mistake made by well-meaning leaders. The driving question that should underlie all business questions is whether or not profits will increase, not only what impact the decision will have on the environment. The EV craze, which has petered out significantly since this time last year, is a great example of company leaders losing sight of profits in favor of the environment. The number of car manufacturers who boldly announced electric-only or significantly enhanced EV fleets in 2024 only to have the two-by-four of company profits hit them squarely upside the head is astounding. Most of them have backtracked or are in financial hardship for not backtracking.

Well-meaning environmentalism should never come at the expense of profits.

Diversity, Equity, Inclusion (DEI)

Another distraction from focusing on profits has been, while to a lesser degree now as compared to this time last year, the DEI movement. DEI, to its credit, is people-focused and, undoubtedly, was well-motivated by many. Nonetheless, kowtowing to externally imposed social norms in order to avoid becoming a corporate pariah carries with it the seeds of failure, because profits and overall corporate health will suffer. Such was the case for countless large and small companies, including McDonalds and Harley Davidson, that elevated DEI above profits. The primary (though not the only) factor that should drive hiring and promotional concerns within a company should be competency and effectiveness. Will the individual help enhance company profits or not?

“Profit” Is NOT a Four-Letter Word

In her classic work, Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand makes this very point. When we vilify “profits,” we do not do ourselves or our fellow man any good. One might say, “It is not profitable to vilify the word ‘profit.’” Profit is good, and it is enormously comforting to see company leaders of all stripes returning to a good, healthy embrace of the profit motive.

Obviously, the ill-founded desire for profits at all costs regardless of the impact on the freedoms and liberties of others is not good and is the exact reason why we have courts of law. Profit cannot and ought not be at the expense of others’ freedoms. Further, the profit motive should not go right up to the line of violating personal freedoms. A true and good profit motive is not devoid of compassion and long-term thinking. It values human life and liberty and tempers its decisions based on what is good in the long run for human flourishing. Sound, profit-motivated decisions are often not easy black and white decisions. There are countless intricacies and complexities. Nonetheless, our default position ought not to be the disparaging of profits. Quite the opposite.

Company leader, stand strong as you do all that you can to build your company profits and don’t be ashamed to say so.

Doug Glenn
Publisher
Heat Treat Today

Contact Doug Glenn at doug@heattreattoday.com.

Find Heat Treating Products And Services When You Search On Heat Treat Buyers Guide.Com

Time for Company Leaders To Refocus on Profits Read More »

Is It Stuffy in Here? Exhaust Systems

/ ATMOSPHERE AIR FURNACES TECHNICAL CONTENT, BURNERS & COMBUSTION SYSTEMS TECHNICAL CONTENT, GUEST COLUMN, Manufacturing Heat Treat Technical Content, OP-ED

In each installment of Combustion Corner, Jim Roberts, president of U.S. Ignition, reinforces the goal of the series: providing informative content to “furnace guys” about the world of combustion. The previous column examined the air supply inlet — the inhale, and this month, Jim is examining the exhaust system — the exhale, and how to inspect it, maintain it, and manage it.

This informative piece was first released in Heat Treat Today’s March 2025 Aerospace print edition.

A guy walks into a room full of furnace guys and says, “Is it just me, or is it a tad stuffy in here?”

We have all been able to imagine that it is hard to focus and do your job in an environment where it seems like it’s hard to breathe. Well, our hard workin’ buddy, the furnace, is continually stuck in a cycle of trying to breathe in, breathe out — and then somewhere in between, the magic of combustion and heat happens! We talked last month about the “breathe in” part of the combustion process. This month, we are going to remind you that if you take a really good, productive, inhaled, life giving breath, you are probably going to want to exhale at some point, too!

Tip 2: Ensure Exhaust Systems Are Properly Functioning and Clean

Inhale, exhale. It makes sense that if we were earlier having issues with the air supply inlet, the exhaust should also be checked. Today’s combustion equipment is sophisticated and sensitive to pressure fluctuations. If the exhaust is restricted, the burners will struggle to get the proper input to the process. I used to use the example of trying to spit into a soda bottle. Try it. It’s tough to do and invariably will not leave you happy. Clean exhaust also minimizes any chance of fire. Read on for three examples.

A. Check the Flues and Exhausts for Soot

If you are responsible for burners that are delivering indirect heat (in other words, radiant tubes), you have a relatively easy task ahead to check the flues/exhausts. Each burner usually has its own exhaust, and one can see if the burners are running with fuel-rich condition (soot/carbon). Soot is not a sign of properly running burners and will signal trouble ahead. Soot can degrade the alloys at a chemical level. Soot can catch fire and create a hot spot in the tubes. Soot obviously signals you are using more fuel than needed (or your combustion blower is blocked, see the first column in this series).

As a furnace operator or floor person, it should be normal operating procedure to look for leakage around door seals.

Here’s a sub tip: If you cannot see the exhaust outlets directly, look around the floor and on the roof of the furnace up by the exhaust outlets. Light chunks of black stuff is what is being ejected into the room when it breaks free from the burner guts (if it can). That will tell you it’s time to tune those burners. If you do not have a good oxygen/flue gas analyzer, get one. It can be pricey, but it will pay for itself in a matter of months in both maintenance and fuel savings.

B. Seriously … Check the Flues and Leakage Around Door Seals

If you are running direct-fired furnace equipment, or furnaces that have the flue gases mixed from multiple burners, it gets a little trickier. All the same rules apply for not wanting soot. Only now, it can actually get exposure to your product, it can saturate your refractory, and it can clog a flue to the point that furnace pressure is affected. An increase in furnace pressure can test the integrity of your door seals. It can back up into the burners and put undue and untimely wear and tear on burner nozzles, ignitors, flame safety equipment, etc. As a furnace operator or floor person, it should be normal operating procedure to look for leakage around door seals.

C. Utilize Combustion Service Companies

Ask the wizards. Combustion service companies can usually help you diagnose and verify flue issues if you suspect they exist. It’s always a great idea to set a baseline for your combustion settings. Service companies can help you establish the optimum running conditions. Again, money well spent to optimize the performance of your furnaces. I’m sure you already have a combustion service team; some are listed in this publication. Otherwise, consult the trade groups like MTI and IHEA for recommended suppliers of that valuable service.

Check flues monthly. It should be a regular walk around maintenance check.

Don’t let the next headline be your plant. See you next issue.

About The Author:

Jim Roberts
President
US Ignition

Jim Roberts, president at US Ignition, began his 45-year career in the burner and heat recovery industry directed for 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.

Contact Jim Roberts at jim@usignition.com.

Find heat treating products and services when you search on Heat Treat Buyers Guide.Com

Is It Stuffy in Here? Exhaust Systems Read More »

CMMC 2.0: Why Waiting Is a Costly Mistake

/ CYBERSECURITY, MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT NEWS, OP-ED

The Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) 2.0 compliance process is detailed and complicated, and businesses in the defense industrial base (DIB) may be tempted to delay this regulatory hurdle. In this Cybersecurity Desk column, which was first released in Heat Treat Today’s March 2025 Aerospace print edition Joe Coleman, cybersecurity officer at Bluestreak Compliance, a division of Bluestreak | Bright AM™, explains why companies putting off CMMC 2.0 compliance may end up scrambling to meet deadlines, incurring costly delays, and even facing potential disqualification from future DoD contracts.

Introduction

The Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) 2.0 is not only a regulatory hurdle, it represents a fundamental shift in the cybersecurity landscape for the Defense Industrial Base (DIB). Ignoring this critical initiative can have severe and potentially irreversible consequences for your company’s future.

Many companies mistakenly believe they can afford to delay their CMMC 2.0 compliance efforts, assuming they have plenty of time to prepare. This is a dangerous assumption. Achieving CMMC 2.0 compliance is a detailed and complicated process that typically takes 12–18 months. Delaying implementation can leave your company scrambling to meet deadlines and increase the risk of costly delays, missed opportunities, and even potential disqualification from future DoD contracts.

The High Cost of Inaction

The consequences of failing to prioritize CMMC 2.0 compliance are significant:

  • Loss of revenue and market share: Non-compliance directly impacts your ability to bid on and win DoD contracts. This translates to lost revenue, limiting growth and a significant competitive disadvantage against companies that have already achieved compliance
  • Erosion of trust and reputation: Failing to meet cybersecurity standards can damage your company’s reputation within the DIB. This loss of trust can impact not only your relationship with the DoD, but also with other key stakeholders, including clients, contractors, partners and investors. Some of your clients may have already asked if you are compliant.
  • Increased vulnerability to cyberattacks: A weak cybersecurity posture leaves your company highly susceptible to cyberattacks. These attacks can have devastating consequences, including data breaches, system disruptions, and significant financial losses. The key cybersecurity component of CMMC is NIST Special Publication 800-171.
  • Significant financial penalties: Non-compliance can result in substantial financial penalties, including fines and contract termination. These penalties can severely impact your company’s bottom line and long-term growth.
  • Operational disruption: The process of implementing and maintaining CMMC 2.0 controls can require significant amounts of time and resources. Delaying these efforts can disrupt your company’s operations, impacting productivity and potentially hindering critical projects.

The Benefits of Proactive Action

By proactively addressing CMMC 2.0 compliance, your company can gain a significant competitive advantage to win more business:

  • Competitive head start: Companies that prioritize CMMC 2.0 compliance gain a significant first-mover advantage. They can demonstrate their commitment to enhanced cybersecurity to the DoD, build stronger relationships with government agencies, and position themselves as preferred partners for future contracts.
  • Reduced stress and increased efficiency: Starting early allows for a more gradual and less stressful implementation process. This reduces the risk of last-minute scrambling and allows for a more efficient and effective integration of cybersecurity measures into your existing workflows.
  • Enhanced cybersecurity posture: The CMMC 2.0 framework provides a structured approach to enhancing your overall cybersecurity posture. By implementing these controls, you not only improve your compliance but also strengthen your defenses against a wide range of cyber threats.
  • Improved operational resilience: A robust cybersecurity program enhances your company’s operational resilience. By minimizing the risk of cyberattacks and their potential disruptions, you can ensure business continuity and maintain a competitive edge in the market.
  • Building a culture of security: CMMC 2.0 implementation encourages a shift towards a culture of security within your company. This includes raising awareness among employees about cybersecurity risks, fostering a sense of shared responsibility, and promoting best practices at all levels.

Conclusion

Click image to download a list of cybersecurity acronyms and definitions.

CMMC 2.0 is not an option; it is a critical requirement for any company seeking to do business with the DoD, its prime contractors, and/or downstream service providers. Procrastination is not an option. By taking proactive steps to understand and address CMMC 2.0 requirements, your company can mitigate risks, enhance its cybersecurity posture, and gain a significant competitive advantage in the evolving defense landscape.

For an up-to-date resource list of common cybersecurity acronyms, click the image to the right.

About the Author:

Joe Coleman
Cyber Security Officer
Bluestreak Consulting
Source: Bluestreak Consulting

Joe Coleman is the cybersecurity officer at Bluestreak Compliance, which is a division of Bluestreak | Bright AM™. Joe has over 35 years of diverse manufacturing and engineering experience. His background includes extensive training in cybersecurity, a career as a machinist, machining manager, and an early additive manufacturing (AM) pioneer. Joe presented at the Furnaces North America (FNA 2024) convention on DFARS, NIST 800-171, and CMMC 2.0.

For more information: Contact Joe at joe.coleman@go-throughput.com.

Find heat treating products and services when you search on Heat Treat Buyers Guide.Com

CMMC 2.0: Why Waiting Is a Costly Mistake Read More »

US DOE Industrial Decarbonization Initiative Update: January 2025, the Trump Effect

/ HEAT TREAT NEWS, MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT NEWS, OP-ED

The heat treating industry is under pressure to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE), and the response has been a noble effort to attain sustainability. In 2024, Heat Treat Today published a series of articles by guest columnist Michael Mouilleseaux, general manager at Erie Steel, Ltd., regarding the U.S. Department of Energy’s initiative related to the decarbonization of industry and its potential impact on the heat treating industry.

This update was first published in Heat Treat Today’s February 2025 Air & Atmosphere Heat Treating Aerospace print edition in response to recent changes in the U.S. administration. To catch up on previous columns by Mike, check these out: “US DOE Strategy Affects Heat Treaters“ appeared in the March 2024 Aerospace print edition; “U.S. DOE Strategy: Ramifications for Heat Treaters” appeared in the May 2024 Sustainability print edition; and “US DOE Strategy: Why the Heat Treating Industry?” appeared in the June 2024 Buyer’s Guide print edition.

As described in previous articles, President Joe Biden issued an executive order in 2021 that committed the federal government through the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reduce GHGE attributable to “process heating” by 85% by 2035 and attain net zero CO2 emissions by 2050.

These goals were to be achieved by implementing four largely unproven technologies:

  • Energy efficiency
  • Industrial electrification (using green electricity)
  • Adoption of low-carbon fuels (e.g., hydrogen), feedstocks, and energy sources (LCFFES)
  • Carbon capture, utilization and storage at the generated source (CCUS)
On www.heattreattoday.com/factsheetDOE, you can utilize the one-page resource to let governmental officials know what our industry is, who we are, who we employ, and the effect this effort has in regulating us out of business.

We further described the negative effect the implementation of these efforts would have on the heat treating industry — specifically, an increase in energy costs from 4x to 15x, with a companion reduction in energy reliability. This is not the combination that portends success in business.

In November of 2024, the people of the United States made a statement. They decided the direction of the country for the past four years was not what they wanted and chose another path, a path they chose based on what they had experienced from 2017 through 2020. As it pertains to industrial policy, they knew that reduced regulation and policies favorable to business growth were the guiding principles.

What may we reasonably expect from a Trump administration relative to this Industrial Decarbonization Effort?

At a minimum, we should expect a sober understanding of the issues and agreement that any low-carbon replacement energy technologies will come with the assurance they are cost competitive with current sources, and that they will be reliable and secure.

Is this to say that all efforts toward the achievement of a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) should be abandoned? Absolutely not, however, they should not be implemented with a religious zeal that places implementation above practicality. We need to recognize that if our way of life is to be maintained, these changes will be evolutionary — not revolutionary.

Should we anticipate this effort to revise the “timing” of GHGE reductions will be easy to achieve? It will not; the Biden administration has made every effort to obligate a maximum amount of the funding from the IRA earmarked for “clean energy,” understanding any funds not so obligated can be rescinded. Additionally, a concerted effort to place these funds in Republican states was made to make any recission as politically painful as possible for the incoming administration.

The incoming administration has made it clear they will scrutinize all existing funding sources that support those clean energy initiatives that distort and undermine energy independence and reliability. They have stated they intend on immediately pausing all regulatory activities until they have the opportunity to review them. They intend on rescinding all executive orders that further the clean energy agenda.

Do we have a part in this? Yes, our industry, although crucial to the manufacturing community and national security, has very little visibility. Now is the time to act and to let our representatives and senators know how important it is to pause, if not reconfigure, this Industrial Decarbonization Initiative to assure our businesses remain vibrant and vigorous.

Attend the 2025 SUMMIT to find out more about the DOE’s actions for the heat treat industry.

About the Author:

Michael Mouilleseaux
General Manager
Erie Steel, Ltd

Michael Mouilleseaux is general manager at Erie Steel, Ltd. He has been at Erie Steel in Toledo, OH since 2006 with previous metallurgical experience at New Process Gear in Syracuse, NY, and as the director of Technology in Marketing at FPM Heat Treating LLC in Elk Grove, IL. Michael attended the stakeholder meetings at the May 2023 symposium hosted by the U.S. DOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy.

For more information: Contact Michael at mmouilleseaux@erie.com.  

Find heat treating products and services when you search on Heat Treat Buyers Guide.Com

US DOE Industrial Decarbonization Initiative Update: January 2025, the Trump Effect Read More »

Why Normalize, and Is a ‘Still Air’ Cool Really Important? Part 1

/ ATMOSPHERE AIR FURNACES TECHNICAL CONTENT, HARDENING TECHNICAL CONTENT, Manufacturing Heat Treat Technical Content, OP-ED

The Heat Treat Doctor® has returned to offer 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.

This informative piece was first released in Heat Treat Today’s February 2025 Air/Atmosphere Furnace Systems print edition.

People often ask two fundamental questions related to normalizing. First, is it necessary? Second, just what and how important is a “still air” cool to the end result? Let’s learn more.

Why Normalize?

Contact us with your Reader Feedback!

Normalizing is typically performed for one or more of the following reasons:

  • To improve machinability
  • To improve dimensional stability
  • To produce a homogeneous microstructure
  • To reduce banding
  • To improve ductility
  • To modify and/or refine the grain structure
  • To provide a more consistent response when hardening or case hardening

For example, many gear blanks are normalized prior to machining so that during subsequent hardening or case hardening dimensional changes such as growth, shrinkage, or warpage will be better controlled.

Normalizing imparts hardness and strength to both cast iron and steel components. In addition, normalizing helps reduce internal stresses induced by such operations as forging, casting, machining, forming or welding. Normalizing also improves chemical non-homogeneity, improves response to heat treatment (e.g., hardening), and enhances dimensional stability by imparting into the component part a “thermal memory” for subsequent lower temperature processes. Parts that require maximum toughness and those subjected to impact are often normalized. When large cross sections are normalized, they are also tempered to further reduce stress and more closely control mechanical properties.

Large paper roll normalized in a car bottom furnace and cooled (due to its mass) using the assistance of a floor fan.

Soak periods for normalizing are typically one hour per inch of cross-sectional area but not less than two hours at temperature. It is important to remember that the mass of the part or the workload can have a significant influence on the cooling rate and thus on the final microstructure. Thin pieces cool faster and are harder after normalizing than thicker ones. By contrast, after furnace cooling in an annealing process, the hardness of the thin and thicker sections is usually about the same.

Micrograph of medium-carbon AISI/SAE 1040 steel showing ferrite grains (white etching constituent) and pearlite (dark etching constituent). Etched in 4% picral followed by 2% nital. (Bramfitt and Benscoter, 2002, p. 4. Reprinted with permission of ASM International. All rights reserved.)

When people think of normalizing, they often relate it to a microstructure consisting primarily of pearlite and ferrite. However, normalized microstructures can vary and combinations of ferrite, pearlite, bainite, and even martensite for a given alloy grade are not uncommon. The resultant microstructure depends on a multitude of factors including, but not limited to, material composition, part geometry, part section size, part mass, and cooling rate (affected by multiple factors). It is important to remember that the microstructure achieved by any given process sequence may or may not be desirable depending on the design and function of the component part.

The microstructures produced by normalizing can be predicted using appropriate continuous cooling transformation diagrams and this will be the subject of a subsequent “Ask The Heat Treat Doctor” column.

In this writer’s eyes, industry best practice would be to specify the desired microstructure, hardness, and mechanical properties resulting from the normalizing operation. Process parameters can then be established, and testing performed (initially and over time) to confirm/verify results.

In many cases, the failure of the normalizing process to achieve the desired outcome centers around the lack of specificity (e.g., engineering drawing requirements, metallurgical and mechanical property call outs, testing/verification practices, and quality assurance measures). Failure to specify the required microstructure and mechanical properties/characteristics can lead to assumptions on the part of the heat treater, which may or may not influence the end result.

“Normalizing is the heat treatment that is produced by austenitizing and air cooling, to produce uniform, fine ferrite/pearlite microstructures in steel … In light sections, especially in alloy hardenable steels, air cooling may be rapid enough to form bainite or martensite instead of ferrite and pearlite.”

What Is Normalizing?

The normalizing process is often characterized in the following way: “Properly normalized parts follow several simple guidelines, which include heating uniformly to temperature and to a temperature high enough to ensure complete transformation to austenite; soaking at austenitizing temperature long enough to achieve uniform temperature throughout the part mass; and cooling in a uniform manner, typically in still air” (Herring, 2014).

It is also important to remember that normalizing is a long-established heat treatment practice. As far back as 1935, Grossmann and Bain wrote:

Normalizing is the name applied to a heat treatment in which the steel is heated above its critical range (that is, heated to make it wholly austenitic) and is then allowed to cool in air.

Since this is one specific form of heat treatment, it will be realized that the structure and mechanical properties resulting from the normalizing treatment will depend not only on the precise composition of the steel but also on the precise way in which the cooling is carried out.

The term ‘normalizing’ is generally applied to any cooling ‘in air.’ But in reality, this may cover a wide range of cooling conditions, from a single small bar cooled in air (which is fairly rapid cooling) to that of a large number of forgings piled together on a forge shop floor … which is a rather slow cool, approaching an anneal. The resulting properties in the two cases are quite different.

In plain carbon steels and in steel having a small alloy content, the air-cooled (normalized) structure is usually pearlite and ferrite or pearlite alone … More rapid cooling gives fine pearlite, which is harder; slow cooling gives coarse pearlite, which is soft. In some few alloy steels, the normalized structure in part may be bainite.

The hardness of normalized steels will usually range from about 150 to 350 Brinell (10 to 35 Rockwell C), depending on the size of the piece, its composition and hardening characteristics.

Importance of Defining Cooling Rate

In 2005, Krauss underscored the importance of defining cooling rate when he wrote: “Air cooling associated with normalizing produces a range of cooling rates depending on section size [and to some extent, load mass]. Heavier sections [and large loads] air cool at much lower cooling rates than do light sections because of the added time required for thermal conductivity to lower temperatures of central portions of the workpiece.”

Microstructures Created by Normalizing

The microstructural constituents produced by normalizing for a particular steel grade can be ferrite, pearlite, bainite, or martensite. The desired microstructure from normalizing adds an important cautionary note, as addressed by Krauss in STEELS (1990 and 2005), namely: “Normalizing is the heat treatment that is produced by austenitizing and air cooling, to produce uniform, fine ferrite/pearlite microstructures in steel … In light sections, especially in alloy hardenable steels, air cooling may be rapid enough to form bainite or martensite instead of ferrite and pearlite.”

Next time: We define a “still air” cool and look at the state of normalizing in North America.

References

ASM International. “ASM Handbook, vol. 4, Heat Treating,” (1991): 35–41.

ASM International. “ASM Handbook Volume 4A, Steel Heat Treating, Fundamentals and Processes,” (2013): 280–288.

ASM International. “Metals Handbook, 8th ed., vol. 1, Properties and Selection of Metals,” (1961): 26.

ASM International. “Metals Handbook Desk Edition,” (1985): 28-11, 28-12.

Chandler, Harry, ed. Heat Treater’s Guide: Practices and Procedures for Irons and Steels. 2nd ed, ASM International, 1995.

Grossman, M. A., and E. C. Bain. Principles of Heat Treatment, 5th ed, ASM International, 1935, 197–198.

Herring, Daniel H. Atmosphere Heat Treatment, vol. I, BNP Media, 2014.

Herring, Daniel H. Atmosphere Heat Treatment, vol. II, BNP Media, 2015.

Herring, Daniel H. “The Importance of Normalizing,” Industrial Heating April 2008.

Krauss, George. STEELS: Heat Treatment and Processing Principles, ASM International, 1990. 463.

Krauss, George. STEELS: Processing, Structures, and Performance, ASM International, 2005. 253–256, 574.

Lyman, Taylor, ed. Metals Handbook, 1948 ed. ASM International, 1948. 643.

Practical Data for Metallurgists, 17th ed. TimkenSteel.

Totten, George E., ed. Steel Heat Treatment Handbook, vol. 2, 2nd ed., CRC Press, 2007. 612-613.

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.

Find Heat Treating Products And Services When You Search On Heat Treat Buyers Guide.Com

Why Normalize, and Is a ‘Still Air’ Cool Really Important? Part 1 Read More »

What Will Heat Treating in the Mid-21st Century Look Like?

/ Manufacturing Heat Treat Technical Content, OP-ED, TECHNOLOGY

The Heat Treat Doctor® has returned to offer 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.

This informative piece was first released in Heat Treat Today’s January 2025 Technologies to Watch print edition.

As a very young engineer, I vividly recall our company president had a statue of a three-headed elephant in his office. One head faced forward, one faced slightly to the right, one faced slightly to the left. The moral: looking backwards is not the path forward! Let’s learn more about what the heat treatment industry will look like by the middle of this century.

The Market

A number of market studies and economic forecast models suggest that the global heat treatment market will grow to between 130–150 billion U.S. dollars by no later than 2030 and to around 200–220 billion U.S. dollars by 2040, barring another significant or sustained global economic event. These forecasts assume several minor downturns in the economy of various countries and in manufacturing segments due to economic and geopolitical factors in the coming decades.

Heat Treatment Market Shift

Contact us with your Reader Feedback!

The most significant and fundamental shift that is and will continue is in the makeup of the heat treatment equipment segment of the North American market. What began in the late 1990s and early 2000s as a transition from older, long-established practices and processes to equipment capable of meeting the rapidly evolving demands of technological innovation will continue. Standardization (for cost containment), changes in manufacturing methods and methodologies, and environmental considerations are also fueling this change.

A demand for higher performance products, end-of-life expectations (in some but not all products), an emphasis on systems with single-piece flow or small batch productivity are just a few examples of this change. Other factors such as equipment obsolescence, the need for even higher manufacturing efficiencies, long term operator health and safety concerns, predictive (as opposed to preventative) maintenance, and adaptation to both the speed at which the manufacturing landscape is changing and the type of flexible equipment/processes reinforce these conclusions.

From an equipment standpoint, vacuum furnaces and applied energy systems are and will continue to experience rapid growth at the expense of more traditional atmosphere furnaces. Safety, open flames and emissions of any kind (NOx, CO2, particulates) are driving this change. As such, the dramatic reduction and control of greenhouse gases and the cooling of our planet by the mid-century will be metamorphic. This trend is not only expected to continue but to accelerate (Figures 1–2).

Figure 1. North American Industry by Equipment Segment, 2012–2018 (see Herring, Atmosphere Heat Treatment, Vol. 1, 2014)

For example, the driving force behind the development, use and integration of vacuum technology into manufacturing is not only due to the fact that it is lean, green, and agile, but also that vacuum technology best addresses the identified needs of the heat treatment industry, namely:

  • Energy efficient equipment
  • Processing with minimal part distortion
  • Optimization of heat treatment processes (especially diffusion-related processes)
  • Environmentally friendly by-products and emissions
  • Adaptability/flexibility for new and advanced materials
  • Process controls incorporating intelligent sensors
  • Designs based on heat treat modeling and simulation
  • Equipment/process integration into manufacturing

Change — Its Pace and Form

A paradigm shift in the workforce has occurred, transitioning to a vastly more mobile and younger group of individuals relying on the growing role of automation and communication in manufacturing. This shift is principally responsible for accelerating the pace of change in the heat treatment industry, from what has traditionally been a slow moving and slow-to-adapt industry, to one capable of meeting the need for rapid deployment of new products and one that keeps pace with technological innovations.

Moving forward, equipment manufacturers and suppliers to the industry will continue to look at product standardization to maximize profitability, thus driving the industry to “cookie cutter” solutions or, in a diametrically opposite philosophy, looking to provide highly customized solutions, often with risk factors incorporated into the pricing as specialized solutions with high profit margins to application-specific needs.

Figure 2. North American Industry by Equipment Segment, 2024–2035 (see Herring, Atmosphere Heat Treatment, Vol. 1, 2014)

Technology/Innovation Drivers and Industry Trends

Heat treatment will always be a core manufacturing competency, and as such, decisions will continue to be made to either heat treat in-house or outsource to commercial heat treatment shops. It is significant that the percentage of manufacturers with in-house heat treat departments (80–85%) to commercial (10–15%) heat treat shops hasn’t really changed in the last six decades! The consolidation of companies is a trend that is expected to continue.

What is more prevalent today than ever is the tremendous pressure being exerted on manufacturing from senior management to increase product velocity and lower unit cost. While recalls seem to be a way of life these days, product liability and consume demands for product performance are forcing change, even in the most extreme applications.

As a result, the most identifiable trends in today’s North American heat treatment industry are:

  • Growing the manufacturing portion (percentage) of GDP through mobility and adaptability, coupled with more sophisticated and higher paying jobs
  • Lowering product unit cost through technology adaptation
  • Obsoleting older equipment and technologies and replacing them with innovative new and/or high productivity heat treatment systems. Examples include:
    • New materials development allowing for different processing methods and/or lower temperature heat treatments while maintaining environmentally friendly equipment and processes
    • Transition of carburizing/ carbonitriding from atmosphere to low pressure vacuum processes with either oil or high-pressure gas quenching, or both
    • Use of single-piece heating and quenching of parts and/or small (versus large) batch processing to improve product velocity
    • Changes in product materials and/or designs to allow more low temperature atmosphere treatments (e.g., nitriding, nitrocarburizing)
  • Use of advanced quenching techniques and quenching technologies to better manage distortion
  • Implementing artificial intelligence-based modeling and simulation software capable of equipment control and process optimization
  • Implementing the next generation of intelligent sensors, real-time data collection methods and analytics (including cloud-based computing)
  • Changing the focus of companies from “generalization” toward “specialization” with respect to products, services, processes (proprietary or unique) and new or innovative technologies to capture greater market share or present opportunities to generate higher profit margins
  • Accelerating the implementation of lean manufacturing strategies and applying these strategies to heat treatment:
    • Eliminate high labor costs (via automation and controls), simplify operations (i.e., reduce the number of manufacturing steps), and adopt “build to order” strategies.
    • Conservation of energy, on-demand part production, shortening of process cycles, and the move toward smaller lot sizes is the order of the day.
  • Continuing the transition from heat treatment departments to integrated manufacturing cells

In Summary

It is, and will be for decades to come, a truly magical time in the heat treatment industry. The slow-moving, plodding, three-headed elephant has been replaced by a lean and agile animal — technology. This will not only ensure a greener workplace but an environment of innovation for future generations. And as I am fond of saying about the future, there’s “magic in the aire!”

References

ASM International, Vision 2020. 1999.

Herring, Daniel H. “Esoteric Heat Treatment Industry Critique: 2019 and Beyond.” Industrial Heating, January 2019.

Herring, Daniel H. Atmosphere Heat Treatment, Volume 1. BNP Media, 2014.

Wolowiec-Koreka, Emilia. Carburising and Nitriding of Iron Alloys. Springer, 2024.

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.

Find Heat Treating Products And Services When You Search On Heat Treat Buyers Guide.Com

What Will Heat Treating in the Mid-21st Century Look Like? Read More »