Dr. Valery Rudnev FASM IFHTSE Fellow

Dr. Valery Rudnev on Equipment Selection for Induction Hardening: Single-Shot Hardening, Part 2

/ FEATURED NEWS, HARDENING, INDUCTION HEATING EQUIPMENT TECHNICAL CONTENT, INDUCTION HEATING TECHNICAL CONTENT, MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT, MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT NEWS

This article continues the ongoing discussion on Equipment Selection for Induction Hardening by Dr. Valery Rudnev, FASM, IFHTSE Fellow. Six previous installments in Dr. Rudnev’s series on equipment selection addressed selected aspects of scan hardening and continuous/progressive hardening systems. This post is the second in a discussion on equipment selection for one of four popular induction hardening techniques focusing on single-shot hardening systems.

The first part on equipment selection for single-shot hardening is here; the third part is here. To see the earlier articles in the Induction Hardening series at Heat Treat Today as well as other news about Dr. Rudnev, click here. 

Traditional Designs of Single-Shot Inductors

Figure 1 shows a typical shaft-like component (Figure 1,top-left) suitable for a single-shot hardening inductor, as well as a variety of traditionally designed single-shot inductors for surface hardening shaft-like workpieces. Sometimes, these inductors are also referred to as channel inductors.

A conventional single-shot inductor consists of two legs and two crossover segments, also known as bridges, “horseshoes,” or half-loops [1]. The induced eddy currents under the legs primarily flow along the length of the part (longitudinally/axially) with the exception of the regions of the workpiece located under the crossover segments where the flow of the eddy current is half circumferential. Unlike scanning inductors, traditional designs of single-shot inductors can be quite complicated.

Figure 1. A typical shaft-like component (top-left image) suitable for a single-shot hardening and a variety of traditionally designed single-shot inductors for surface hardening shaft-like workpieces (Courtesy of Inductoheat Inc., an Inductotherm Group company)
Figure 1. A typical shaft-like component (top-left image) suitable for a single-shot hardening and a variety of traditionally designed single-shot inductors for surface hardening shaft-like workpieces (Courtesy of Inductoheat Inc., an Inductotherm Group company)

With a predominantly longitudinal eddy current flow, the heat uniformity in the diameter change areas of the stepped shafts is dramatically improved and the tendency of corners and shoulders to be overheated is reduced significantly compared to applying a single-turn or multi-turn solenoid coils commonly used in scan hardening and continuous/progressive hardening.

Because the copper of single-shot inductors does not completely encircle the entire region required to be heated, rotation must be used to create a sufficiently uniform austenitized surface layer along the workpiece perimeter. Upon quenching, a sufficiently uniform hardness case depth along the circumference of the part will be produced. For single-shot inductors, the rotation speed usually ranges from 120 to 500 rpm.

Different types of magnetic flux concentrators (also called flux intensifiers, flux controllers, flux diverters, magnetic shunts, etc.) complement the copper profiling of an inductor, helping to achieve the required hardness pattern. Flux concentrators may provide several considerable benefits when applied in single-shot inductors. This includes an increase of coil electrical efficiency, a noticeable reduction of coil current, and a significant reduction of the external magnetic field exposure.

As an example, Figure 2 shows a transverse cross-section of a single-shot inductor and a straight shaft. Computer-modeled electromagnetic field distribution of a bare inductor (Figure 2, left) compared to an inductor with a U-shaped flux concentrator (Figure 2, right) is shown. Note that the magnitude of magnetic field intensity on both images is different. The use of U-shaped magnetic flux concentrators in single-shot hardening applications typically results in a 16% to 27% coil current reduction compared to using a bare inductor while having a similar heating effect. A reduction of the external magnetic field exposure while applying flux concentrator is even more dramatic (Figure 2, right).

Figure 2.  Computer-modeled EMF distribution in the transverse cross-section of a bare inductor (left) compared to an inductor with U-shaped flux concentrator (right). Note: the scale of magnetic field intensity on both images is different [1].
Figure 2.  Computer-modeled EMF distribution in the transverse cross-section of a bare inductor (left) compared to an inductor with U-shaped flux concentrator (right). Note: the scale of magnetic field intensity on both images is different [1].
Different applications may call for various materials used to fabricate magnetic flux concentrators including stacks of silicon-steel laminations, pure ferrites, and various proprietary multiphase composites. The selection of a particular material depends on a number of factors, including the following [1]:

  • applied frequency, power density, and duty cycle;
  • operating temperature and ability to be cooled;
  • geometries of workpiece and inductor;
  • machinability, formability, structural homogeneity, and integrity;
  • an ability to withstand an aggressive working environment resisting chemical attack by quenchants and corrosion;
  • brittleness, density, and ability to withstand occasional impact force;
  • ease of installation and removal, available space for installation, and so on.

It should be noted that, though in most single-shot hardening applications flux concentrators will improve efficiency, there are other cases where no improvement will be recorded, or efficiency may even drop. A detailed discussion regarding the subtleties of using magnetic flux concentrators is provided in [See References 1, 2.].

Sufficient rotation is critical when using any single-shot inductor design. As an example, Figure 3 shows the sketch of a single-shot induction hardening system.

Figure 3.  Sketch of single-shot induction hardening of an axle shaft. Note: The right half of this induction system is computer-modeled in Fig. 4 [3].
Figure 3.  Sketch of single-shot induction hardening of an axle shaft. Note: The right half of this induction system is computer-modeled in Fig. 4 [3].
Taking advantage of symmetry, only the right side of such a system was modeled using finite-element analysis. Figure 4 shows the result of computer simulation of initial, interim, and final heating stages, taking into consideration the shaft rotation. Insufficient part rotation resulted in a non-uniform temperature distribution along the shaft perimeter (Figure 4, left). Proper shaft rotation results in a sufficiently uniform temperature pattern (Figure 4, right).

Figure 4.  Results of numerical simulation of heating an axle shaft by using a single-shot inductor [3].
Figure 4.  Results of numerical simulation of heating an axle shaft by using a single-shot inductor [3].
There should be at least eight full rotations per heat cycle (preferably more than 12 rotations), depending on the size of the workpiece and the design specifics of the inductor, though, as always in life, there are some exceptions. Shorter heating times and narrower coil copper heating faces require faster rotation during the austenitization cycle.

An appropriate inductor design with a closely controlled and monitored rotation speed will produce a hardness pattern with minimum circumferential and longitudinal temperature deviations, which will result in sufficiently uniform hardness patterns (Figure 5, left four images). Failure to ensure proper rotation as well as the use of worn centers (lacking grabbing force resulting in slippage and excessive part wobbling) could lead to an unacceptable heat non-uniformity, severe local overheating, and even melting (Figure 5, right). Manufacturers of induction equipment such as Inductoheat have developed various proprietary tools, holders, fixtures, and monitoring devices to ensure proper rotation and high quality of single-shot hardened parts.

Figure 5.  Inductor design with closely controlled rotation speed will produce a hardness pattern with minimum circumferential temperature deviations (left four images). Failure to ensure proper rotation speed as well as the use of worn centers (lacking grabbing force resulting in slippage) could lead to unacceptable heat non-uniformity and can even cause a localized melting (right image).
Figure 5.  Inductor design with closely controlled rotation speed will produce a hardness pattern with minimum circumferential temperature deviations (left four images). Failure to ensure proper rotation speed as well as the use of worn centers (lacking grabbing force resulting in slippage) could lead to unacceptable heat non-uniformity and can even cause a localized melting (right image).

The next installment of this column, "Dr. Valery Rudnev on . . . ", will continue the discussion of design features of induction single-shot hardening systems.

References

  1. V.Rudnev, D.Loveless, R.Cook, Handbook of Induction Heating, 2nd Edition, CRC Press, 2017.
  2. V.Rudnev, "An objective assessment of magnetic flux concentrators", Heat Treating Progress, ASM Intl., December 2004, pp 19-23.
  3. V.Rudnev, "Simulation of Induction Heat Treating", ASM Handbook, Volume 22B, Metals Process Simulation, D.U. Furrer and S.L. Semiatin, editors, ASM Int’l, 2010, pp 501-546.

 

Dr. Valery Rudnev on Equipment Selection for Induction Hardening: Single-Shot Hardening, Part 2 Read More »

Dr. Valery Rudnev on . . . Equipment Selection for Induction Hardening: Single-Shot Hardening, Part 1

/ FEATURED NEWS, HARDENING, INDUCTION HEATING EQUIPMENT TECHNICAL CONTENT, INDUCTION HEATING TECHNICAL CONTENT, MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT, MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT NEWS

This article continues the ongoing discussion on Equipment Selection for Induction Hardening by Dr. Valery Rudnev, FASM, IFHTSE Fellow. Six previous installments in Dr. Rudnev’s series on equipment selection addressed selected aspects of scan hardening and continuous/progressive hardening systems. This post continues a discussion on equipment selection for induction hardening focusing on single-shot hardening systems.

The first part on equipment selection for continuous and progressive hardening is here. The second part in this series on equipment selection for single-shot hardening is here; the third part is here. To see the earlier articles in the Induction Hardening series at Heat Treat Today as well as other news about Dr. Rudnev, click here. This installment continues a discussion on equipment selection for continuous and progressive hardening applications.

Why Single-Shot Hardening?

With the single-shot method, neither the workpiece (cylinder shaft, for example) nor the coil moves linearly relative to each other; the part typically rotates instead.¹ The entire region that is to be hardened is heated all at once rather than only a short distance, as is done with scan hardening.

With conventional scan hardening of cylindrical parts, induced eddy currents flow circumferentially. In contrast, a single-shot inductor induces eddy currents that primarily flow along the length of the part. An exception to this rule would be the half-moon regions (also called the crossover or bridge sections) of a single-shot inductor, where eddy current flow is circumferential.

Normally the single-shot method is better suited for hardening stepped parts where a relatively short (1.5–2 in. [38–50mm] long heated area is commonly minimum) or moderate length area is to be heat treated. This method is also better suited to cylindrical parts having axial symmetry and complex geometry including various diameters.

When scanning these types of parts, improper austenitization of certain areas may occur due to localized electromagnetic field distortion, for example. Insufficient quenching due to the deflection of quench flow not allowing it to properly impinge on the surface in various diameter regions may also occur. Both factors are considered undesirable and can cause low hardness, spotted hardness, or even cracking. For example, the use of scan hardening on stepped shafts with large shoulders, multiple and sizable diameter changes, and other geometrical irregularities and discontinuities (including fillets, flanges, undercuts, grooves, etc.) may produce severely non-uniform hardened patterns. In cases like this, a scan hardening inductor or progressive/continuous hardening system would be designed around the largest diameter that would have sufficient clearance for safe part processing.¹ However, variations in the shaft’s diameter, to a significant extent, will result in a corresponding substantial deviation in the workpiece-to-coil coupling in different sections of the shaft, potentially causing irregular austenization.

Besides that, sharp corners have a distinct tendency to overheat owing to the buildup of eddy currents, in particular when medium and high frequencies are used. The electromagnetic end and edge effects may also cause the shoulders to severely overheat while the smaller-diameter area near the shoulder (including undercuts and fillets) may have noticeable heat deficit. These factors may produce a hardness pattern that might grossly exceed the required minimum and maximum case depth range, making it unacceptable. Single-shot hardening is usually a better choice in such applications. As an example, Figure 1 shows some examples of components for which single-shot hardening would be a preferable method of heat treating.

Examples of components for which a single-shot hardening would be a preferable method of heat treating. (Courtesy of Inductoheat Inc., an Inductotherm Group company)

 

In some not so frequent cases, when hardening larger parts, there are advantages to the single-shot method over the scanning method, such as the reduction of shape/size distortion, enhanced metallurgical quality, and increased production rate.

Single-shot hardening may also be the preferred choice when shorter heat times/high production rates are desired. For example, in some applications, the time of heating for single-shot hardening can be as short as 2 s, though 4 to 8 s is more typical.

However, the single-shot method has some limitations as well. One of them is cost. Single-shot inductors are typically more expensive to fabricate compared to the coils used for scanning. This is because the single-shot inductor, to some degree, must follow the contour of the entire region required to be heated. Additionally, a single-shot inductor is usually able to harden only one specific part configuration, whereas a coil used for scanning may be able to harden a family of parts.

Besides that, in some case hardening applications using a scanning method, it is possible to apply certain pre-programmed pressure/force on a workpiece during heat treating. This allows distortion to be controlled. Single-shot hardening might also permit applying this technique but there might be some limitations.

Design Features of Single-Shot Inductors

Single-shot inductors are made of tubing, either 3-D printed or CNC-machined from solid copper to conform to the area of the part to be heated. This type of inductor requires the most care in fabrication because it usually has an intricate design and operates at high power densities, and the workpiece’s positioning is critical with respect to the coil copper profiling. Figure 2 shows several examples of induction heating of different components using single-shot inductors.

Several examples of induction heating of different components using single-shot inductors. (Courtesy of Inductoheat Inc., an Inductotherm Group company)

 

In order to provide the required temperature distribution before quenching, heat is sometimes applied in several short bursts (pulse heating) with a timed delay/soaking between them to allow for thermal conduction toward the areas that might be difficult to heat.

Single-shot inductors typically require higher power levels than used in scan hardening because the entire area of the workpiece that needs to be hardened is austenitized at once. This is the reason why single-shot hardening normally requires having a noticeably larger power supply compared to scan hardening, resulting in increased capital cost of power source. Additionally, the increased power usage and power densities combined with complex geometry can reduce the life of the inductor. For this reason, single-shot inductors often have shorter lives than scan inductors.

It is always important to keep in mind that, electrically speaking, the inductor is typically considered the weakest link in an induction system. For this reason, most single-shot inductors have separate coil-cooling and part-quenching circuits. The inductor will fail if power is increased to the point at which the water cannot adequately cool it. Additional cooling passages may be needed with high-power density, single-shot inductors. A high-pressure booster pump is also frequently required.

The next several installments of Dr. Valery Rudnev on . . . will continue the discussion on design features of single-shot inductors and equipment selection.

 

References

  1. Rudnev, D.Loveless, R.Cook, Handbook of Induction Heating, 2nd Edition, CRC Press, 2017.

 

Dr. Valery Rudnev on . . . Equipment Selection for Induction Hardening: Single-Shot Hardening, Part 1 Read More »

Dr. Valery Rudnev, FASM, IFHTSE Fellow, Honored To Deliver Heat Treat Lecture

/ MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT, MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT NEWS

Dr. Valery Rudnev, FASM, IFHTSE Fellow, was selected to be the Woodside lecturer at the most recent ASM Detroit Chapter meeting. The Woodside lecture took place on May 13, 2019, at Burton Manor in Livonia, Michigan. The title of the lecture was “Recent Theoretical and Practical Novelties in Induction Heat Treatment“.

Dr. Rudnev serves as Director of Science and Technology at Inductoheat, Inc. Known within the ASM Int’l and among induction heating professionals as “Professor Induction” for his 40+ years of experience in the heat treating industry, Dr. Rudnev centered his Woodside lecture on recent theoretical and practical novelties in induction heat treatment. He also unveiled common mispostulations associated with induction heating and frequently overlooked metallurgical subtleties.

Thermal processing by means of electromagnetic induction continues to grow at an accelerated rate, replacing alternative processes. Today’s metalworking and heat treating industry must quickly adjust to a rapidly changing business environment, maximizing cost effectiveness, process flexibility, and energy efficiency, yet satisfy continuously increasing demands for higher-quality products, equipment longevity, and environmental friendliness.

Induction heating is a multifaceted phenomenon comprising a complex interaction of electromagnetics, heat transfer, circuit analysis, power electronics and metallurgical phenomena that are tightly interrelated. Novel designs have appeared quite regularly.

The Woodside Lecture is named after William P. Woodside, who founded the American Society for Materials (ASM Int’l.) in Detroit in 1913. Each year, the chapter honors an outstanding member of
the ASM community by asking them to give the annual Woodside Lecture.

Dr. Rudnev holds more than 50 patents and inventions (U.S.and International) and has appeared in more than 250 engineering/scientific publications. He also frequently contributes content to Heat Treat Today. His most recent series, “Equipment Selection for Induction Hardening: Continuous and Progressive Hardening” can be found on Heat Treat Today’s website or in Heat Treat Today’s quarterly print editions.

 

Photo Caption: (from left-to-right)  Dr. Robert C. McCune, FASM (Tech Chair of this event), Dr. James Boileau, ASM Detroit Chair 2018-19, and Dr. Valery Rudnev, FASM, IFHTSE Fellow (the Woodside Lecturer)

Dr. Valery Rudnev, FASM, IFHTSE Fellow, Honored To Deliver Heat Treat Lecture Read More »

Dr. Valery Rudnev on … Equipment Selection for Induction Hardening: Continuous and Progressive Hardening, Part 3

/ FEATURED NEWS, INDUCTION HEATING EQUIPMENT TECHNICAL CONTENT, MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT, MANUFACTURING HEAT TREAT NEWS

This article continues the ongoing discussion on Equipment Selection for Induction Hardening by Dr. Valery Rudnev, FASM, IFHTSE Fellow. Dr. Rudnev previously reviewed equipment selection for scan hardening in three parts. The first part on equipment selection for continuous and progressive hardening is here; the second part is here. To see the earlier articles in the Induction Hardening series at Heat Treat Today as well as other news about Dr. Rudnev, click here. This installment continues a discussion on equipment selection for continuous and progressive hardening applications.

Inductor Designs

So far, I have discussed the application of conventionally designed solenoid coils in continuous/progressive hardening applications. However, even multiturn solenoid-type coil geometries may have quite complex shapes accommodating the shape of induction hardened components. One illustration of this is shown in Figure 1 where two in-line multiturn solenoid-type inductors are used for heat treating of an irregular shape component.

Figure 1. Two in-line multiturn solenoid inductor of a complex shape. (Courtesy of Inductoheat Inc., an Inductotherm Group company)
Figure 1. Two in-line multiturn solenoid inductor of a complex shape. (Courtesy of Inductoheat Inc., an Inductotherm Group company)

Besides multiturn solenoid coils, channel-type multiturn inductors (also called slot or skid inductors) are frequently used in continuous/progressive heat treating. The channel inductor gets its name from its similarity to a long channel. This shape allows parts to be passed through the coil in a number of ways, such as a conveyor, shuttle, indexing, rotary or carousel table, turntable, or any other indexing system.

Channel coils permit easy entry and exit of the heated components to/from the inductor. Figure 2 shows images of some examples of multiturn channel inductors. The crossover ends of channel coils are bent away to allow the part to pass through. In some cases, the crossover ends are made high enough to ensure minimum impact on the heating of the part at the ends of the coil, minimizing electromagnetic forces when workpieces enter and exit the inductor. In other cases, the opposite might be true, and crossover coil regions play an important part in providing the needed temperature distribution.

Figure 2. Images of different examples of multiturn channel inductors. (Courtesy of Inductoheat Inc., an Inductotherm Group company.)
Figure 2. Images of different examples of multiturn channel inductors. (Courtesy of Inductoheat Inc., an Inductotherm Group company.)

Channel coils are used to heat treat selected regions of parts, as well as entire components. These inductors are often used for through hardening, annealing, and tempering applications. However, if a specific case depth is required, rotation of the workpiece may be needed to even case depth.

Figure 3 shows a “state-of-the-art” continuous fed induction system for heat treating fasteners [2]. This system is adjustable for a wide range of fastener/bolt diameters and lengths (0.5–4.0 in. [12–102 mm]) and is capable of production rates of up to 600 fasteners per minute. The unique proprietary coil design developed by Radyne Corporation maximizes electrical efficiency and system flexibility while preventing stray heating of electrically conductive surroundings that may potentially cause undesirable heating of structures and malfunction of electronic devices. The rotary dial tooling is designed to accept bolt fasteners from the in-line vibratory feeder. The adjustable speed rotary table contains advanced safety features to prevent damage and meltdown.

The quench assembly allows adjusting the quench flow for the utmost in quench control. After spray quenching, parts are stripped from the traverse assembly and dunk quenched into the tank for final cooling to room temperature.

Figure 3 shows a “state-of-the-art” continuous fed induction system for heat treating fasteners [2].
Figure 3 shows a “state-of-the-art” continuous fed induction system for heat treating fasteners [2].
The tooling is designed with a quick change feature to ensure that all tooling can be changed for a different part size in less than 15 minutes. The system is controlled through a controls package and HMI for part setup and part storage of different programs. Through this HMI, the power source coil “Z” adjustment can also be stored and adjusted for different bolt lengths assuring superior quality fasteners. This unit includes four sizes of tooling required for the rotary heat treat fixture and the traverse tooling: M6, M8, M10, and M12.

Besides solenoid coils and channel inductors, other inductor styles are used including split-return, hairpin and double hairpin inductors, transverse flux, and traveling wave inductors. However, an application of those inductors is not as frequent for continuous/progressive induction hardening.

References

  1. V.Rudnev, D.Loveless, R.Cook, Handbook of Induction Heating, 2nd Edition, CRC Press, 2017.
  2. J.Mortimer, V.Rudnev, Bernhard,A., Induction Heating and Heat Treating of Fasteners, Fastener International, February, 2019, p.50-53.

Dr. Valery Rudnev on … Equipment Selection for Induction Hardening: Continuous and Progressive Hardening, Part 3 Read More »

15 Quick Heat Treat News Items to Keep You Current

/ FEATURED NEWS, HEAT TREAT NEWS INDUSTRIES

15 Quick Heat Treat News Items to Keep You Current

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

Personnel and Company Chatter

  • Thomas Persson recently joined Therma-Tron-X Inc. as their newest HTF (Heat Treat Furnace) sales engineer.
  • Chromalox has announced the opening of its new sales and operations office in Korea.
  • Thomas “Tucker” Hamling II was recently appointed to the position of sales manager with ZIRCAR Refractory Composites, Inc., responsible for domestic technical sales while also providing technical guidance to the company’s customers.
  • A definitive agreement has been reached between Tenaris S.A. and PAO TMK, a Russian company and manufacturer of steel pipe, to acquire 100% of the shares of PAO TMK’s wholly owned U.S. subsidiary IPSCO Tubulars, Inc.
  • Beaumont Machine has relocated to a new larger manufacturing facility, still in the Cincinnati area, to expand the machine line for components for new markets such as semiconductor materials processing and land-based power generation, particularly turbine blades.
  • The American Foundry Society is pleased to welcome Tom Dore as Technical Director. Formerly a vice president at AFS Corporate Member Alu-Bra Foundry, Dore has years of hands-on experience in foundry operations, including plant engineering, heat treating, sand casting, customer quality, and sales.
  • Mike Winkelmann, an industry veteran, has been appointed the new General Manager of the fast-growing Mechanical Services division of Plibrico Company, LLC.
  • Paulo recently announced three leadership changes to the Operations team. Kyle Moore has been promoted to Plant Manager of the St. Louis Division, Tim Mohr has been promoted to Director of Strategic Programs, and Tee Rassieur has been promoted to Vice President Operations.

 Equipment Chatter

  • A Tier 1 automotive manufacturer recently chose Can-Eng Furnaces International Ltd to design and commission a high-capacity, heat-treatment system, providing T-6 and T-7 processing capabilities for lightweight aluminum High Pressure Die Casting (HPDC) automotive components.
  • A medical device manufacturer required an oven to preheat an aluminum mold for a silicone part that was to be filled and cured in the next manufacturing step and contracted with Despatch. The company develops innovative products that improve patient outcomes by enabling minimally invasive surgery.
  • A company that requires the heat treating of automotive parts in baskets recently purchased the No. 1040, a 2200°F (1204°C), inert atmosphere pit furnace, from Grieve Corporation.

Kudos Chatter

  • Dr. Valery Rudnev, FASM IFHTSE Fellow, the Director of Science & Technology at Inductoheat Inc., was recently appointed this year’s speaker at the Woodside Lecture of the Detroit Chapter of ASM. The Woodside Lecture is named for William P. Woodside, the founder of ASM in Detroit (1913). Dr. Rudnev will be discussing “Recent Theoretical and Practical Novelties in Induction Heat Treatment.”
  • Saint-Gobain recently announced that Neha Dave, business manager of Specialty Materials at Saint-Gobain Ceramics & Plastics, has been named a 2019 STEP Ahead Emerging Leader by The Manufacturing Institute. Additionally, the institute is recognizing Silham El Kasmi, operational director for Saint-Gobain Crystals in France, as a 2019 STEP Ahead Award Honoree. Dave and El Kasmi were recently honored during an Awards Dinner Gala in Washington, D.C.
  • The world’s largest wind-turbine blade—351 feet (107 meters) long—has been manufactured by LM Wind Power in Cherbourg, France, as part of a GE Renewable Energy Haliade-X 12-MW offshore turbine. The blade is comprised of multiple thin layers of glass-and-carbon fibers with wood, fused together with resin.
  • In addition, the largest rotary tilting furnace in the world has been manufactured and supplied by GHI Smart Furnaces, in a project subsidized by the Basque Government in which the company has worked together with Befesa and Tecnalia. This is the second time the company has reached a world record.
  • Heat Treat Today is pleased to join in the announcements of growth and achievement throughout the industry by highlighting them here on our News Chatter page. Please send any information you feel may be of interest to manufacturers with in-house heat treat departments especially in the aerospace, automotive, medical, and energy sectors to the editor at editor@heattreattoday.com.

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

Skip to content