Heat Transfer Analysis in Electron Beam Machining
Rishabh Jain, Shivam Yadav, Avnish
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bhilai
1 Introduction
Electron beam machining is one of the examples of
non-conventional machining under the thermal process
category, along with laser beam machining, electric
discharge machining,and plasma cutting. This process
uses high velocity electrons for material removal,
which is done primarily by melting and rapid
vaporization due to intense heating by electrons. The
earliest work of material removal utilizing an electron
beam was attributed to Steigerwald who designed a
prototype machine in 1947. Electron beam machining
has been used in industry since the 1960s, initially in
nuclear and aerospace welding application.
Electron beams themselves carry out several beneficial
properties which make them well suited to be used in
material handling (Crawford, 1962). First, electron
beams have such short wavelength that can produce
high energy electrons. Hence, very high resolution and
long depth of field is achievable. The second aspect is
about their extraordinary energy density. It far
surpasses any conventional energy source with the
power density of 10^9 watts/cm2. Because of the high
scattering cross section of electrons in solids, this
power can be easily extracted in the form of heat in a
thin layer of material. The third one is their ability to
catalyze many chemical reactions, thus allowing them
to be used to selectively destroy or create thin films.
And the last,electron beams are particularly easy to
control. They can be positioned rapidly and accurately
in space and time, and are very suitable for use in
completely automated processes.
Due to the favorable characteristics of electron beam,
such as high energy density, adjustable heating and
cooling rates, precise control of the beam properties
and so on, electron beam treatments of metals and
alloys are of great industrial interests in the past
decades. The fundamental process of the electron
beam based metal treatment is to transfer the kinetic
energy of electrons to the heating energy and then to
interact with the metals within the penetration depth.
The interactions between the electron beam and
materials are studied extensively for a few decades.
When the materials are undergoing a rapid heating and
cooling process, the temperature field on the material
surface form a dynamic temperature and stress fields,
which prompt the formations of either thermal
inducing structures or the chemical change to
strengthen the metallic materials . Thus the modeling
and simulations of such highly dynamic temperature
and stress fields are the main focus of many research
on electron beam machining. Additionally, in a real
world electron beam treatment process, the appropriate
scanning scheme of the beam action over the impact
area is critical for the formation of the residual stress
distribution, material microstructure and mechanical
properties. Additionally, the electron beam spot and its
relative moving manner influence both the temperature
distribution over the surface and the melting depth
under the surface layer, which are critical in the
modeling of the dynamic process of the beam action.
The energy transfer field causes an isothermal
temperature distribution at the surface of the steel,
such isothermal distribution can be obtained via a line
pattern where the line distance is dense enough at first
and gaps between the lines is increased toward the end
of the energy transfer field.
Temperature distribution is the critical factor that
dictates melting, microstructure and eventually the
final part quality. Monitoring or measuring the
temperature during the process is extremely difficult
due to the ultra-high speeds and microscale size of the
laser or electron beam. Therefore, other tools such as
finite element modeling can be utilized to optimize
these processes and predict the behavior of the system
for different materials. This research presents transient,
dynamic finite element model of the build process for
electron beam melting techniques. Experimental
validation and optimization of multi-track periodical
heating are also presented and discussed.
Mechanism
Electron beam is generated in an electron beam gun,
which is basically a triode consists of a cathode, a grid
cup negatively biased with respect to the cathode, and
an anode at ground potential (McGeough, 1988). Due
to being dependent on the use of high velocity
electrons, the whole process of this machining has to
be performed under vacuum condition, including the
placement of the workpiece to be machined. Else, the
electrons would interact with the air molecules of
which condition they can lose their energy and cutting
ability.The electron gun produces such high energy
focused beam which is made to invade the workpiece
with a spot size of 10-200 µm. As the beam strikes the
surface of the work material, the kinetic energy of the
high velocity electrons is converted to heat energy.
This will make the spot gradually getting bigger and
deeper due to the melting and vaporization of material
caused by the high power density. This process will be
carried out until the desirable depth is created. The
molten material,as the product of the material removal
process, will be cast out from the cutting zone by the
high vapor pressure at the lower part.
Heat source model based on Monte Carlo
simulation
In this section, the fundamentals of Monte Carlo
simulation and its applications in the complex
electron-matter interactions are presented. Multiple
energetic electron groups when impinging on the solid
surface are illustrated in Fig. 1, which gain their
energy from the external accelerating field and lose the
energy through a variety of processes. As shown in
Fig. 1, only the electrons with enough energy are
capable of transmitting and interacting with the surface
layer. Monte Carlo method uses random numbers and
probability distributions, which represent the physical
interactions between the electrons and the material
atoms. The simulation of electron transport in the solid
material consists of two computational aspects: the
traces of the electron beam transporting inside the
solid material cube and the physical interaction with
the internal matter.
Fig. 1.​ Depth of penetration of electrons.[5]
The penetration depth distribution, the energy
absorptivity and the energy distribution along radial
and axial directions of the electron beam can be
calculated via the great amount of each single electron
trajectory in our model. The parameters of the electron
beams are shown in Table 1 which is in accordance
with the experimental conditions. In this study, the
electron number is set to be 200,000 to obtain
statistically reliable results. The input energy density
per unit volume in the surface treatment process as a
function of radius and incident depth z is shown in Eq.
where a is the energy absorptivity, U is the
accelerating voltage, I is the beam current, P is the
energy per unit area, r is the radius of electron beam, s
is the penetration depth, f (z ) is the energy distribution
along the electron beam incident direction while f (r )
is the energy distribution along the radius direction. In
order to obtain the accurate heat source model, the
electron penetration depth, energy distribution and
energy absorptivity are three critical parameters
derived from this model.
 emissions of the secondary and thermal electrons are
limited to low values and can be neglected due to
space-charge formation. And the total dissipation
amounts to about 1/1000 the beam power.

Table 1: Process Parameters [5]

​Fig. 2.​ Depth of penetration of electrons.[5]

Derivation of Depth of Penetration
The penetration depth is defined as depth underneath
where the mean energy of transmitted electrons is
reduced to zero. Sample material for electron beam
treatment in this study is 30CrMnSiA high strength
low alloy (HSLA) carbon structural steel. By using the
simulation parameters shown in Table 1, the
trajectories of the electrons interact with the
30CrMnSiA steel can be simulated and illustrated in
Fig. 2. The red lines in Fig. 2 represent the escape of
electrons while the blue represent the absorbed
electrons. And the electrons within the cross section
are mutually independent. Thus, the penetration depth
only depends on the initial velocity, material property
and the incident angle. It can be concluded that the
maximum penetration depth is 28 µm while most of
the electrons are trapped in the range from 5 µm to 20
µm.
Energy Absorptivity
The transmitted electron stands for the electrons
exiting the sample toward the bottom. In this study, the
sample is set to be much thicker than the electron
range thus the transmitted electron is not taken into
consideration. Thus in this work, the fraction of the
energy absorption is the ratio of the sum of energy
absorbed for all the electron trajectories to the total
input energy. According to the experimental
parameters in this study, it can be determined by the
dissipation of the backscattered electrons, which is
0.191255 . Thus energy absorptivity in Eq. equals to
be 0.8087.

The energy absorptivity is defined as the ratio of

energy absorbed by the workpiece to the total input
energy. It is determined by the material properties,
electron beam properties and electron beam incidence
angle. Beam action upon impingement on matter is
Fig. 3​.Variation of Intensity with the radial
shown in Fig. 1. As illustrated in Fig. 1, there are a
distances[6]
variety of energy loss processes: the X Ray radiation
and the dissipation caused by the secondary,
thermionic, transmitted electrons and backscattered
In summary, based on the Monte Carlo simulation of
electrons. For electron beam (EB) devices with the
electron-material interactions, the general form of the
acceleration voltage less than 300 kV, the energy
electron beam heat source model should be:
losses caused by the X-radiation can be neglected. The

where Q represents the beam power , the first
expression is modelled as the distribution in the
transverse direction i.e f(z). The expression in the third
bracket denotes variation in radial direction i.e f(r).
Thermal modeling and optimization of
electron beam treatment temperature field
Single electron beam scanning without overlap rate is
shown in Fig. 4(a). The center of the melting zone
represents the deepest area at the cross section of the
electron beam with Gaussian energy distribution. As
shown in Fig. 4(b), the melting depth between two
tracks shows distinct difference thus an uneven
melting zone underneath the surface layer is formed
due to the improper overlap rate. Fig. 4(c) shows the
idealized heat treated shape with the uniform melting
depth in the heat affected zone (HAZ), where the
surface width represents the width of the melting track
and the HAZ is comparatively small with an
appropriate electron beam overlap rate.

The new heat source model derived from Monte Carlo

simulation is implemented in the COMSOL software
to simulate the temperature field distribution on the
electron beam surface treatment process. A three
dimensional non-linear and non-equilibrium
thermodynamic-physical equations are used to fully
describe dynamic process induced by the electron
beam using finite element method. The multi-track
periodical scanning strategy of the electron beam is
simulated according to the experimental conditions Fig. 4. Schematic of the electron beam treated depth
A transient thermal model to simulate the temperature zone.
field during electron beam surface treatment is
developed in this section.
Multiple assumptions are required to simplify the
model and calculations within the simulation resource
limitations.
1. Temperature analysis is in transient mode.
2. The solid material is considered to be homogeneous
over the whole simulation region.
3. The electron beam is assumed transmitting along the
vertical direction on the material surface as the original
direction.
4. Due to the extremely high heating and cooling rates
and the short treatment time, the heat transfer to the
workpiece is dissipated only by conduction, which is
dominated while the influence of the liquid metal
convection can be neglected.

Governing equation Fourier heat conduction equation

for time dependent conduction problem is taken as the
governing equation as presented in Eq​.

where K(T) is the temperature, t is the time, is the

material density, C is the heat capacity, k is thermal
conductivity, and q is the heat per unit volume which
is derived from the Monte Carlo simulation.

Fig. 5​. Temperature distribution on the surface at
irradiation time of 3 ms with different overlap rate.
The surface topography is varied with different overlap
rate, which is caused by the non-uniform distribution
of the surface temperature.(Fig5) Thus, at a given
irradiation time, the optimal overlap rate can be
derived according to the simulation results presented in
this work to obtain the optimal uniform distribution of
the surface temperature. The temperature distributions
on the surface at irradiation time of 3 ms with overlap
rate of 0%, 30%, 60% and 80% are shown in When
the overlapping rate is lower than 60%, the regular
rippled fluctuation on the surface topography will
occur. However, at the irradiation rate higher than
60%, the surface temperature is above the boiling point
of the 30CrMnSiA steel, while the surface quality will
deteriorate due to the intense heat convection.
According to the simulation results, it can be validated
that the appropriate overlap rate is 60% at the e-beam
irradiation time of 3 ms.
2 Experimental Details
where d is the electron beam diameter, the diameter of
the electron beam is about 0:2 mm, which is measured
by an electron beam profiler developed by TWI (The
Welding Institute). r is the radial location from the
central axis of the electron beam cross section. And P0
is the maximum power density at the beam center.
According to (1), there is an exponential decrease
along the radial direction of the electron beam,
resulting in great inhomogeneity of the power density
and heat on the sample surface. Thus in our work, a
high frequency electron beam scanning scheme is
proposed to obtain a two-dimensional isothermal
temperature distribution on the beam irradiated. By
accurately adjusting the parameters of the deflection
coil and magnetic lens, the continuous electron beam
moves at a repetition rate up to 100 kHz to eliminate
the beam inhomogeneity introduced by Gaussian
distribution.
The input energy density can be averaged on the
irradiation area. As shown below.
E = UIt /S
E – Irradiation energy (J/mm2 )
U – Accelerating voltage (V).
I – Beam current (A).
t – Irradiation time (s)
S – Irradiation area (mm2 )
3 Results and Discussion
3.1 Effect of parameters on surface properties
As stated in the above section, 30CrMnSiA samples
are preconditioned in oil at 880 C and subsequently
tempered at 415 C for 45 min. The microstructures
before the electron beam irradiation are shown in Fig.
6(a) and (b). Fig. 6(a) is an optical micrograph of the
base metal. As illustrated in Fig. 6(a), the base metal is
initially composed of ferrite (white part), lamellar
pearlite, and troostite (dark clump) pre beam
irradiation. Troostite is a kind of fine pearlite which
can only be recognized under high magnifications. The
lamellar distance of troostite is under 100 nm [28]. A
high magnification SEM photo of troostite under SEM
is presented in Fig. 6(b). The lamellar distance is
shown in the micrograph.
After continuous electron beam irradiation, the
macro-structure and micro-structure of 30CrMnSiA
sample are presented in Figs. 7 and 8. As shown in
Fig. 7, two distinct areas including base metal and
hardening zone are illustrated. Fig. 6 shows a
scanning electron micrograph of electron beam treated
30CrMnSiA. Additionally, a further zoom-in view of
the micro-structure of 30CrMnSiA sample is
illustrated in Fig. 7. Typical features of martensite and
bainite can be observed. The results show that the
microstructure of 30CrMnSiA in the hardening zone
are mainly consists of martensite while small amount
of bainite appears at the transition zone. The
microstructure post beam irradiation is obviously
varied due to the rapid cooling on the treated area.
Micro hardness is an indicator of wear and chemical
resistances of given material. In this section, vickers
micro hardness values of samples from A to G,
corresponding to irradiation time varied from 1 to 7 s,
are measured along the depth from the surface,
including the depth of hardened layer and maxim
hardness.
The depth of the hardened layer is proportionally Fig. 6.​(b) Scanning electron micrograph of
increased with the input energy density. When the 30CrMnSiA base metal(Troostite)​[4]​.
input energy density is varied from 0.625 kJ/cm2 to
4.375 kJ/cm2 , depth of hardened layer is increased
from 50 lm to 1100 lm. But the maximum hardness
forms at the irradiation time of 3 s, with an input
energy density of 1.875 kJ/cm2 . When the irradiation
time is varied from 1 to 3 s, the maximum hardness is
increased from 320 to 520 HV​0.2 under the input energy
density varying from 0.625 kJ/cm2 to 1.875 kJ/cm2 .
However, after 4 s, the maximum hardness starts to be
decreased with increasing input energy density of
electron beams due to convective mixing of the melted
zone which becomes dominant after 4 s. In the area
with convective mixing, the cooling rate is relatively
lower, thus the micro hardness is lower.
Fig. 7. Scanning electron micrograph of electron beam
treated 30CrMnSiA​[4]​.

Fig 6​: (a) Optical micrographs of 30CrMnSiA base

metal(Troostite)​[4]​. Fig. 8. Scanning electron micrograph of 30CrMnSiA
post irradiation​[4]​.
The formation of martensite and bainite depends upon
the cooling rate and the temperature of element if the
cooling rate of a steel is greater than 430 °C/s than
martensite is formed and the cooling rate below the
martensite layer is less and there temperature is also
low. Hence bainite is formed.
Fig. 9. Variation of temperature with depth for
different intensity of electron beam.
Surface topography and roughness
Plots of 30CrMnSiA samples after 0 s, 4 s and 7 s
electron beam irradiations are presented in Fig. 10.
Each data point corresponds to the mean value of five
measurements with error bars. As shown in the plot, in
the first 4 s of irradiation time, the increased input
electron energy density is having a demonstrable effect
on the improvement of the surface roughness. But
identical with the observations presented above, the
surface roughness starts to be increased after 4 s with
increased input electron energy density. The surface
roughness is even increased to 777.7 nm after 7 s
electron beam irradiation, which is 87.2% higher than
the surface roughness before surface treatment.
Fig. 10. Surface roughness of electron beam hardening
samples under different irradiation time.
4 Conclusion
The technology of surface hardening by scanning
electron beam with the continuous interaction
technique are investigated for surface hardening
treatment on 30CrMnSiA HLSA carbon structural
steel. Microstructure, micro hardness, surface
roughness and chemical composition after a diversity
of electron beam conditioning parameters are
investigated experimentally and compared with current
pulsed electron beam surface treatment method
LEHCEB technology. Based on the results and
analysis presented in the above sections, the main
conclusions are summarized as follows:
(1) In the electron beam irradiation process, the depth
of hardened layer and micro hardness are going up
with increased input electron energy density under
irradiation time ranging from 1s to 7s. But the
maximum hardness forms at the irradiation time of 3–4
s, with an input energy density of 1.875 kJ/cm2 to 2.5
kJ/cm2 . The maximum hardness starts to be decreased
with increasing input energy density of electron beams
due to convective mixing of the melted zone which
becomes dominant after 4 s. In the area with
convective mixing, the cooling rate is relatively lower,
thus the micro hardness is lower. The optimum
hardening on 30CrMnSiA can be obtained at
irradiation time of 4 s and electron energy density of
2.5 kJ/cm2 .

(2) The increased input electron energy density is

having a demonstrable effect on the improvement of
the surface roughness. But identical with the
observations presented above, the surface roughness
starts to be increased after 4 s with increased input
electron energy density. The surface roughness is even
increased to 777.7 nm after 7 s electron beam
irradiation, which is 87:2% higher than the surface
roughness before surface treatment.

5 References
[1]Surface hardening of 30CrMnSiA steel using
continuous electron beam Yulei Fu, Jing Hu, Xianfeng
Sheh, Yingying Wang.
[2]Z. Lei, B. Li, L. Ni, Y. Yang, S. Yang, P. Hu,
Mechanism of the crack formation and suppression in
laser-mag hybrid welded 30crmnsia joints, J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 239 (2017) 187–194.
[3]L. Hua-dong, H. Wen-rong, G. Peng, L. Shijie,
Study on metallographic structure and property of
welded joint for laser beam welding of the quenched
and tempered 30crmnsia, Appl. Laser 6 (2003) 000.
[4]P. Petrov, D. Dimitrov, M. Aprakova, S. Valkanov,
Surface hardening of alloy steels using a high intensity
electron beam, Mater. Manuf. Process 13 (4) (1998)
555–564.
[5]Hybrid particle-thermodynamic model and
experimental validation of multi-track periodical
heating during electron beam treatment, Jing Hu, Yulei
Fu, Dong Lib, Yingmou Zhu, Ruixue Zhang ,
Wansheng Zhao.
[6]Yan, Wentao & Smith, Jacob & Ge, Wenjun & Lin,
Feng & Liu, Wing. (2015). Multiscale modeling of
electron beam and substrate interaction: a new heat
source model. Computational Mechanics. 56.
10.1007/s00466-015-1170-1.