Heat Treat Simulation: Benefits of DANTE

Sales, Training, Support & To get the most accurate
Development provided by: Heat Treatment Modeling

DANTE Solutions, Inc. Software, contact the
7261 Engle Road, Suite 105 experienced engineering
Cleveland, OH 44130
team at DANTE Solutions,
(440) 234-8477
sales@dante-solutions.com Inc.
DANTE Utility Programs
DANTE Solutions has developed several stand- Benefits of DANTE
alone utility programs that aid in the design of Troubleshoot Heat Treatment Problems
carburization schedules and enable the and Lower Manufacturing Costs HEAT TREAT
expansion and customization of the DANTE ▪ Reduce Rework
material database. These utilities process ▪ Reduce / Eliminate Post Heat Treatment SIMULATION
standard mechanical and dilatometry test data. Operations, i.e. straightening, grinding
In addition, heat transfer data sets can be Improve Quality
derived from measured time-temperature data. ▪ Control Distortion, Residual Stress and
Once the data have been fit, the parameters can Hardness
be evaluated using several utilities.
Enhance Design Capability
The Utilities include: ▪ Predict the Impact of New Designs or
• GCarb: Gas Carburization Scheduler Design Modifications on Manufacturing
▪ Conduct Less Costly “Virtual”
• VCarb: Vacuum Carburization Scheduler
Experiments
• Dilot_Fit: Phase Transformation Model
Parameters Fitting from Dilatometry Data “Since we started using their software we
• TTT_Fit: Phase transformation Model have gone through several projects that
Parameters Fitting from TTT & CCT Diagrams have increased our understanding of heat
• Mec_Fit: Mechanical Model Parameters treatment and some of which that have
Fitting from Standard Tension and saved us production costs. One example
Compression Test Data was enabling us to gain the leverage
• HTC_Fit: Heat Transfer Coefficient Fitting needed to make a material and process
from Thermocouple Experiments change on a legacy product that is now
• TTT_Generator: TTT & CCT Diagram saving us at least 25% on material costs.”
-Brian W. -Cummins
Generation from DANTE Material Database
• Mat_Simulator: Phase & Hardness
Prediction for User Defined Heating/Cooling
Curves
• Jominy_Predictor: Jominey end quench
predictions from DANTE Material Database DANTE Solutions, Inc.
• CHT_Generator: Rate based austenite
transformation behavior www.DANTE-Solutions.com
HEAT TREATMENT applied to not only troubleshooting existing
processes, but also process optimization using
Technical Features
DANTE is a unique, validated technology
DESIGN TOOL gas and vacuum furnaces.
incorporating advanced material models, fully
coupled mechanics, and highly efficient solution
Improve Part Performance by Controlling
DANTE® is the State-of-the-Art in heat treatment algorithms that will improve heat treatment
Residual Stress
simulation software, promoting improved modeling efficiency and accuracy for your
The capability of DANTE to provide accurate
component and process design in heat treatment. engineering team.
prediction of residual stress resulting from the
DANTE is a set of user subroutines used in heat treating operation makes DANTE an
important design tool to help improve part Thermal-Diffusion-Mechanical Simulation
conjunction with Ansys or Abaqus
performance! For example, a quenching process DANTE provides flexible, efficient analysis of a
finite element (FE) software that
has been modified to achieve deeper and higher variety of thermal-stress problems, including
predicts in-process and final
residual compression for improved fatigue life in austenitization, carburization, nitriding, quenching
distortion, stress state, hardness,
precision gears. and tempering.
and metallurgical phase fractions in
carburized, nitrided or through-hardened steel
Customize and Expand the Material Database
parts. User friendly interfaces have been
DANTE includes comprehensive material data for
developed for both FE software packages to aid
mechanical and phase transformation behavior of
the user in DANTE model setup.
plain carbon, low and medium alloy steels, and
DANTE couples a multiphase constitutive model most carburizing grades of steel. Mechanical data
directly with diffusive and are generated using conventional tension and
martensitic phase compression tests. Phase transformation model
transformation kinetics parameters are determined from ASTM Standard
models. With DANTE, dilatometry experiments. Software utilities have
metallurgists, process been developed to expand and customize the
Improve Part Performance by Controlling the
engineers, heat treaters material and process databases by the user.
Microstructure
and designers can
Acquiring the proper microstructure after heat
predict the evolution and Validated Technology
treatment is critical for part performance. DANTE
final stress state, volume The capabilities of DANTE have been validated
can be utilized to ensure the required material
fractions of metallurgical using experiments and plant trials. Verifications of
properties are met. The effect of process and
phases, part distortion, model accuracy include comparisons of predicted
material changes can be quickly evaluated.
and the final hardness. and measured residual stress, hardness,
Evaluate Effect of Process / Design Changes dimensional changes and phase fractions for a
Practical on Heat Treat Distortion range of steels, part geometries, and processes.
The effect of geometric and processing
Applications modifications
DANTE has been verified for a wide variety of on the
complex real-life heat treatment applications. A resulting
powerful and versatile design tool, DANTE heat treat
provides valuable response
insight into your heat can be
treating process. assessed
rapidly. In
Optimize Carburizing particular,
and Nitriding quench
Schedules hardening
DANTE provides accurate predictions of carbon processes can be modified to reduce distortion Rapid Solutions / Analytical Efficiency
and nitrogen profiles, including carbide/nitride while achieving required hardness and residual ▪ Two- and Three-Dimensional Models
formation and dissolution. DANTE has been stress profiles. ▪ Available for Windows and Linux platforms
Heat Treat 2019: Proceedings of the Copyright © 2019 ASM International®
30th ASM Heat Treating Society Conference All rights reserved.
October 15–17, 2019, Detroit, Michigan, USA www.asminternational.org
DOI: 10.31399/asm.cp.ht2019p0228
Causes of Distortion during High Pressure Gas Quenching Process of Steel

Parts
Justin Sims, Zhichao (Charlie) Li, B. Lynn Ferguson
DANTE Solutions, Inc., Cleveland, OH, U.S.A.
Abstract Finite Element Model Description

Quench hardening is a necessary process for improving the Geometry and Finite Element Model
mechanical and fatigue performance of load bearing steel The study utilized a 50.8 mm thick, 101.6 mm diameter disk,
components, but liquid quenching can lead to large distortions. with a 50.8 mm eccentric bore, as shown in Fig. 1. The thinnest
High pressure gas quenching is becoming a more popular cross-section measures 6.35 mm. The thickest cross-section
choice, with the assumption that a slower cooling rate will lead measures 44.45 mm. The geometry was chosen for the
to less distortion. While true for certain geometries, nonuniform heating/cooling which occurs due to the
nonlinearities in distortion response can make understanding nonsymmetric mass distribution.
the dimensional change of a component difficult due to the
inherently complex behavior during quenching. Through the
use of modeling, and a specially designed coupon, the out-of-
round distortion of an eccentric bore is examined for common
high-pressure gas quenching conditions. The causes of
distortion are examined and explained using the model, with
insights into why the cooling rate has a nonlinear relation with
distortion.
Introduction
High pressure gas quenching (HPGQ) is touted as a means to

reduce distortion of difficult to quench geometries. Quench
pressures and quench gas flow velocities are chosen to impart
the slowest cooling rate, while still achieving the desired
mechanical properties. While it is true that HPGQ imparts a
more uniform method of heat extraction when compared to
liquid quenching [1-2], due to convective cooling only, that
does not necessarily mean less distortion of the component. Figure 1: Model geometry, with dimensions, used for study.
However, a more uniform quench can result in more consistent
distortion. Liquid quenching can lead to inconsistent results due
to the chaotic nature of the vapor blanket and the Taking advantage of symmetry, the model was reduced to a
unpredictability of the vapor blanket’s degradation into quarter section, as shown in Fig. 2. This reduction is possible if
nucleate boiling [2]. Uniformity in this instance is in reference the heat transfer coefficient applied to the surface is uniform on
to the heat transfer coefficient witnessed by the surface of the all surfaces. In keeping the study limited to the geometry’s
component, not the heat flux through the surface. The heat flux effect on distortion, this is a valid assumption. All nodes on the
out of the part is a combination of the heat transfer coefficient YZ-Plane Symmetry surface, shown in Fig. 2(B), cannot
and the component geometry. translate in the x-direction and all nodes on the XY-Plane
Symmetry cannot translate in the z-direction.
Assuming this heat transfer coefficient can be made perfectly
uniform on all surfaces, geometric features will still create
nonuniform cooling scenarios [3]. These nonuniform cooling
conditions can create nonlinearities in the distortion response of
certain geometries. This paper will explore one such geometric
feature: An eccentric bore. Such a feature should immediately
stand out as a difficult to quench geometry due to the non-
balanced mass distribution. Not only is the distortion of this
geometry difficult to control, the nonlinear distortion response
to different heat transfer coefficients makes selection of proper
gas quenching parameters non-intuitive.
228
Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2019/83997/228/521899/ht2019p0228.pdf

by guest
Each quench vessel, whether for gas or liquid quenching, will
behave differently, with respect to the heat transfer coefficient
realized by the component. The chamber pressure and
quenchant velocity over the part are two of the most critical
parameters when determining a proper HTC to describe a
HPGQ vessel. While local variations in the heat transfer
coefficient can exist due to effects from component geometry
or vessel flow characteristics, generally a constant HTC can be
used to describe a HPGQ process. As such, this study ignored
any HTC nonuniformities. However, unlike liquid quenchants,
gas quenchants experience a fluctuation in ambient temperature
near the part.
Figure 2: (A) Full, 3D model of geometry and (B) Quarter Figure 4 shows the ambient gas temperature as a function of
model used for study. time used for the modeling study. The curve describes a dual
chamber system, whereas the single component, or small load,
The 3-dimensional solid model of the quarter section geometry is heated in one chamber under vacuum or a protective
was then meshed in Abaqus for finite element analysis (FEA). atmosphere, transferred in a vacuum chamber, and loaded into
Abaqus Standard was used as the FE solver, and DANTE was a pressure vessel at room temperature. The ambient gas
used to predict the material’s response during heat treatment. temperature in the vessel rapidly increases as the hot load is
Figure 3 shows the quarter model properly meshed for heat introduced, then cools as the heat exchanger continually cools
treatment simulation. Figure 3(A) shows the fine mesh near all the quench gas, reducing the component’s temperature.
surfaces which would be exposed to the atmosphere. Figure
3(B) shows a close-up of the mesh near a corner. The fine mesh 350
near the surface is required to properly describe the steep
Ambient Temp., °C 300
temperature and phase transformation gradients that occur from
the surface towards the core during the heat treating process. 250
200
150
100
50
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
time, sec
Figure 4: Temperature versus time used to describe the ambient

temperature during gas quenching for the study.
Results and Discussion
Figure 3: (A) Mesh used for quarter model and (B) Close-up of Distortion from Common Gas Quenching Rates
surface mesh. Using the DANTE heat treatment simulation software, the
Ferrium C64 disk was subjected to a range of possible HPGQ
Process Description HTCs, using the time-temperature curve in Fig. 4. The
The study examined a range of heat transfer coefficients (HTC) following heat transfer coefficients were evaluated: 10, 25, 50,
typical of HPGQ and the distortion response of the coupon 100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600, 700, 800, 900, and 1000 W/m2K.
shown in Fig. 1 made from Ferrium® C64TM. The chemical Generally, HTCs of 200, 400, 700, and 1000 W/m2K
composition of Ferrium C64 is shown in Table 1. correspond to quench pressures of 2, 6, 10, and 20 bar,
respectively. This relationship will vary depending on the flow
Table 1: Chemical composition of Ferrium C64. pattern and velocity profile of the quench gas in the vessel and
around the component.
The distortion mode of interest for this study was out-of-round

of the eccentric bore. The distortion was determined by the
difference of the distances B1-B2 and A1-A2, as shown in Fig. 5.
Figure 6 shows the results from the study, plotted as out-of-
round distortion, in μm, versus HTC, in W/m2K.
229

by guest
Distortion from Heating (Austenite Transformation)
The component starts with a fully martensitic microstructure at
20° C and is heated to 1000° C, transforming fully to austenite.
The furnace starts at room temperature and is linearly ramped
to 1000° C in 30 minutes. Figures 7 – 11 show the volume
fraction of austenite (left) and radial displacement, in
millimeters, of the bore (right) at critical times during the
heating process. The radial displacement is with respect to the
bore’s geometric origin and all figures use a displacement
magnification of 25X.
Figure 7 shows the component at the instant before austenite

Figure 5: Points showing the locations of measurements transformation starts. Due to the mass difference, the thin
defining the out-of-round distortion. section of the bore heats faster, and is slightly larger in the radial
direction, than the thick section of the bore. This makes the bore
slightly larger in the vertical direction.
450
out-of-round distortion, μm
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
HTC, W/m2K Figure 7: Snapshot of heating, just prior to austenite
transformation, showing austenite phase fraction (left) and
radial displacement of bore in mm (right).
Figure 6: Out-of-round distortion of the coupon bore as a
function of the heat transfer coefficient. Austenite transformation begins in the thinnest section first.
The increase in density from martensite to austenite reduces the
radial dimension at the thin section of the bore. This makes the
It is commonly assumed that if a component is quenched bore slightly larger in the horizontal direction than in the
slower; i.e., a lower HTC value, less distortion will occur. As vertical direction. As the austenite progresses up the sides of the
can be seen in Fig. 6, the highest HTC studied nearly produced bore, the increase in density begins to reduce the radial
the least amount of out-of-round distortion. The only HTCs that dimension around the bottom half of the bore. This increases
produced less distortion in this case can be associated with an the horizontal dimension of the bore even further, as shown in
air cool (10, 25, and 50 W/m2K). The most distortion occurred Fig. 8.
from an HTC of 400 W/m2K. This observation contradicts the
above assumption and leads to the question: How can
quenching slower produce more distortion?
Before answering that question, let’s determine how the out-of-

round distortion is introduced by examining the two critical
process steps: Heating, during which time the initial
microstructure is transformed to austenite, and cooling, during
which time the austenite decomposes to martensite. During this
study, the additional complexity introduced by the volume
difference between the starting and ending microstructure is
ignored by starting with a fully martensitic microstructure. Base
carbon Ferrium C64, 0.1% carbon, will transform to martensite Figure 8: Snapshot during heating as the austenite progresses
and a small amount of retained austenite if subjected to the around the bore, showing austenite phase fraction (left) and
HTCs examined in this study. Other materials may respond radial displacement of bore in mm (right).
differently during quench due to transformation products other
than martensite. Only Ferrium C64 was used for this study.
230

by guest
With the austenite transformation complete around the lower ¾ The distortion generated from the heating process shown does
of the bore, the transformation in the thick section acts to stretch not consider any residual stresses that may have been present
the bore vertically, as shown in Fig. 9. The stretching in the from previous manufacturing operations, which would distort
vertical direction is due to the shrinkage of the thick section. the component as the stresses are released from the high
temperatures. The model also does not consider any thermal
nonuniformities which may be present in the vessel. The part
now proceeds to quench with a slightly out-of-round bore, even
though precautions were taken to heat the part slowly and
uniformly. The next section looks at the quenching process, and
how the martensite transformation contributes to the out-of-
round distortion.
Distortion from Quenching (Martensite Transformation)

Every HTC and ambient temperature combination will cause a
slightly different distortion response, due to the timing of the
martensite transformation in different locations of the part.
Figure 9: Snapshot during heating after the austenite has However, the mechanism responsible for the out-of-round
completed in thin section and is progressing through the thick distortion remains the same. This example uses an HTC of 400
section, showing austenite phase fraction (left) and radial W/m2K and the variable ambient temperature shown in Fig. 4
displacement of bore in mm (right). to demonstrate how the martensite transformation contributes
to the out-of-round distortion of the bore. This example ignores
Since there is more mass to transform in the thick section, the the distortion from heating and instead assumes that the
bore is left stretched in the vertical direction after heating, as component starts at 1000° C, 100% austenite, and stress and
shown in Fig. 10. strain free. Figures 12 – 17 show martensite phase fraction (left)
and the radial displacement, in millimeters, of the eccentric bore
(right) at several critical times during the quenching process.
The radial displacement is relative to the bore’s geometric
origin and all figures use a displacement magnification of 25X.
Figure 12 shows the instance during quench just prior to the

start of the martensite transformation. The bores vertical size
has been significantly reduced by the thermal contraction of the
thin section, while the thick sections remains relatively hot.
Figure 10: Snapshot at the end of the austenite transformation,

showing austenite phase fraction (left) and radial displacement
of bore in mm (right).
Once the component reaches 1000° C, there is an additional

expansion, but the shape of the bore remains the same, as shown
in Fig. 11.
Figure 12: Snapshot of quenching, just prior to martensite

transformation, showing martensite phase fraction (left) and
radial displacement of bore in mm (right).
Figure 13 shows that ~85% martensite is now in the thin section

and is beginning to progress from the bottom of the bore to the
top. This initial transformation does not change the shape of the
bore considerably, since the expansion of martensite from
austenite acts to push in the horizontal direction. However, the
bottom of the bore does grow a little wider during this initial
Figure 11: Snapshot at the end of heating, showing austenite transformation.
phase fraction (left) and radial displacement of bore in mm
(right).
231

by guest
enough to bring the bore back to a circular shape, as shown in
Figure 16.
Figure 13: Snapshot during quenching as the martensite

completes in the thin section and begins to progress around the
bore, showing martensite phase fraction (left) and radial
displacement of bore in mm (right). Figure 16: Snapshot during quenching after the martensite has
completed in thin section, is nearly complete in the upper half
As the martensite front progresses around the bore, the of the bore, and is progressing rapidly through the thick
expansion acts to stretch the bottom of the bore in the vertical section. Shown is martensite phase fraction (left) and radial
direction, as shown in Fig. 14. At this point, the radius at the displacement of bore in mm (right).
bottom of the bore is smaller than the radius at the top of the
bore. Once the martensite transformation is complete, ~97.5% for
C64 with 0.1% carbon, the bore is clearly larger in the vertical
direction, as shown in Fig. 17. The coupon is at room
temperature in Fig. 17.
Figure 14: Snapshot during quenching as the martensite

progresses around the bore, showing martensite phase fraction
(left) and radial displacement of bore in mm (right).
Figure 17: Snapshot at the end of quenching, showing
With the martensite transformation complete in the lower half martensite phase fraction (left) and radial displacement of bore
of the bore, and nearly complete on the upper half of the bore, in mm (right). The part is at room temperature at this point.
the martensite transformation has significantly stretched the
bore in the vertical direction, as shown in Fig. 15. Armed with a better understanding of the mechanisms
responsible for the out-of-round distortion of the bore, an
examination of several conditions is needed to understand why
a slower quench rate will not always lead to less distortion. The
next section will compare three HTC values to explore this
conundrum.
HTC Comparison
Referencing Fig. 6, since 100 W/m2K (HTC100) produces more
distortion than 1000 W/m2K (HTC1000), but produces a
significantly slower cooling rate in the component, these two
conditions will be compared. These two conditions will also be
Figure 15: Snapshot during quenching after the martensite has compared to the HTC that causes the most out-of-round
completed in thin section and has begun around the top half of distortion of the bore, 400 W/m2K (HTC400).
the bore. Shown is martensite phase fraction (left) and radial
displacement of bore in mm (right). Table 2 outlines the out-of-round distortion for each of the three
conditions caused by Heating Only, Quenching Only, and from
As the martensite transformation begins to rapidly progress the Entire Process. Also included is the sum of Heating Only
through the thick section, the reduction in density pushes the and Quenching Only, compared to the distortion from the Entire
thick section out in the horizontal direction. This expansion Process. Since the heating was the same for all quenching
reduces the oblong shape of the hole somewhat, but it is not HTCs, the difference in distortion must be from the quenching
process. It should also be noted that the total out-of-round is the
232

by guest
sum of the distortion created by the heating and quenching heating. The distortion caused by thermal effects during
processes for this particular geometry. Therefore, it is only quenching, however, is very significant. The nonlinearity of the
necessary to examine the quenching process to determine what distortion with respect to the HTC is revealed without
differentiates the three HTCs with respect to distortion of the considering the phase change. However, HTC100 produces
bore. much less distortion than HTC1000. Whereas, when phase
transformations are considered, HTC1000 results in the lowest
Table 2: Comparison of Heating, Quenching, and Entire predicted distortion. Therefore, to fully understand the
Process predicted distortion of bore for HTCs of 100, 400, and distortion response of a component, the effects of phase
1000 W/m2K. transformations must be accounted for.
HTC100 HTC400 HTC1000 To determine how the highest HTC evaluated can produce less
From From From distortion than one of the lowest HTCs evaluated, a comparison
Quenching Quenching Quenching between these three HTC values during the martensite
out-of-round from
245.6 μm 319.1 μm 178.1 μm transformation is warranted. Figures 19 – 23 show martensite
Quenching phase fraction comparisons between the three HTC values: 100,
400, and 1000 W/m2K. Figure 18 describes the two views
HTC100 HTC400 HTC1000 shown in Figs. 19 – 23.
From From From
Heating Heating Heating
out-of-round from
135.6 μm 135.6 μm 135.6 μm
Heating
Sum of Quenching
& Heating 381.2 μm 454.7 μm 313.7 μm
Distortion
HTC100 HTC400 HTC1000

Complete Complete Complete
Process Process Process
out-of-round from
358.5 μm 425.9 μm 313.3 μm
Complete Process
Percent Difference
of Sum and 6% 7% 0%
Complete Process
Figure 18: Description of views shown in Figures 19 – 23.
The out-of-round values reported in Table 2 include distortions
from phase transformations and thermally induced plastic Each quarter section of the geometry will behave the same due
strain. Using the DANTE software, it is possible to disable the to the geometric symmetry and the uniform HTC applied to all
phase transformations during the analysis. Table 3 shows the surfaces exposed to the atmosphere. The comparisons between
out-of-round distortion of the bore for heating and quenching the three HTC values are made when the maximum martensite
without the phase transformations to austenite and martensite, phase fraction is approximately equal in particular sections of
respectfully. The mechanical properties of austenite were used the coupon. The times at which these values occur will vary
for the predictions reported in Table 3. depending on the HTC value.
Table 3: Comparison of Thermally Induced predicted distortion Figure 19 shows a comparison when the martensite phase
of bore for HTCs of 100, 400, and 1000 W/m2K. reaches 80% for the first time. For all HTC values, this occurs
on the outer edge of the thin section. At this snapshot in time,
HTC 100 No HTC 400 No HTC 1000 No all three HTC values show a similar pattern. The maximum
Heat, No Heat, No Heat, No amount of martensite is at the thinnest section of the part on the
Phase Phase Phase
surface of the end face. However, a few differences can be seen.
out-of-
round from 5.8 μm 5.8 μm 5.8 μm Firstly, HTC100 has a significant amount of martensite,
Heating approximately 50%, already half way around the bore, with
out-of- approximately equal amounts of martensite at the surface and
round from 25.5 μm 119.3 μm 112.6 μm in the core. Secondly, HTC400 also has an area of 50%
Cooling martensite, but it is concentrated in the thin section of the
coupon. The martensite fraction for HTC400, like HTC100, is
The thermally induced distortion from heating is very small, almost equivalent on the surface and in the core. Thirdly, the
5.8μm, due to the ramped heating. This small value can be HTC1000 martensite has progressed approximately the same
considered insignificant and indicates that the nonuniform distance around the bore as HTC400, but there is almost no
austenite transformation is responsible for the distortion during martensite transformation occurring in the core at this time.
233

by guest
As the martensite transformation progresses in HTC1000,
reaching its maximum value of ~98%, there is a steep
circumferential transformation gradient around the bore, as
shown in Fig. 21. A steep transformation gradient also occurs
from the surface towards the core, resulting in less martensite
transformation per unit volume for HTC1000 than for HTC400.
This phenomenon can be attributed to the reduced distortion of
HTC1000. The bottom figure in Figure 21 clearly shows that
the transformation is occurring on the surface of the thick
section, even before the bore has completely transformed. This
means that as the transformation progresses around the bore,
acting to elongate the bore in the vertical direction, the
transformation in the thick section is acting to offset this
elongation by stretching the bore in the horizontal direction.
Figure 19: Comparison of martensite fraction for 3 HTC values

when martensite fraction reaches 0.80.
It is ultimately this pattern, shown in Fig. 19, that is responsible

for the variation in the distortion response of the eccentric bore.
Figure 20 shows a snapshot when the martensite reaches 90%
for each condition. It now becomes very clear that the
martensite transformation for HTC100 progresses very
uniformly from the surface to the core and is also very uniform
over large volumes of material around the bore. The behavior
of HTC400 is also becoming rather clear: The martensite
transformation is very uniform from the surface to the core, just
as HTC100. However, unlike HTC100, there is a relatively
steep transformation gradient circumferentially around the
bore.

when martensite fraction reaches ~0.98.
The next snapshot, Figure 22, shows the moment when the
martensite transformation completes in the thin section of the
coupon. It is now obvious as to why HTC400 produces the
greatest amount of out-of-round distortion: A uniform
transformation from the surface to the core, combined with a
steep transformation gradient circumferentially around the
bore, results in the bore being elongated in the vertical direction
with no offsetting effect from transformations occurring in the
thick section of the coupon. Although the transformation has
started near the surface of the thick section of HTC400 in Fig.
22, the damage has already been done by the transformation
completing in the thin section and nearly completing up the
sides of the bore before starting in the thick section.

when martensite fraction reaches 0.90.
234

by guest
Figure 22: Comparison of martensite fraction for 3 HTC values Figure 23: Comparison of martensite fraction for 3 HTC values
when martensite fraction reaches 0.98 in thin section. when martensite fraction reaches 0.98 around all of bore.
The martensite transformation behavior from the HTC100 trial Additional Observations Concerning the Eccentric Bore
is in stark contrast to that of the HTC400 trial. The Due to differences in transformation timing at critical locations
transformation for HTC100 progressed with a very shallow of the part, the distortion response did not behave as anticipated.
transformation gradient around the circumference of the bore, The model presented used a simple geometry and a perfectly
with the martensite beginning in the thick section well before uniform heat transfer coefficient during heating and quenching.
the transformation was complete in the thin section. This Reality is never this kind. In most cases the ambient
allowed the elongating effect in the vertical direction, created temperature and/or the HTC in the bore would vary from the
by the martensite transformation progressing up the sides of the outer diameter and end faces of the coupon used in the study.
bore, to be offset by the stretching effect in the horizontal Table 4 looks at five (5) scenarios of differing boundary
direction, created by the transformation to martensite in the conditions placed on the bore of HTC400, during quenching
thick section. Figure 22 shows that there is approximately 90% only, and compares them to the quench only HTC400 result.
martensite halfway up the side the bore and nearly 60% The ambient temperature profile and HTC from the above study
martensite in the thick section of HTC100. were used for the outer diameter and end face surfaces of the
coupon.
HTC1000’s transformation around the bore progresses much
like HTC400, but with one critical difference: As the martensite While gas quenching offers a more uniform method of heat
progresses up the sides of the bore, martensite is forming in the extraction than liquid quenching, geometry can alter this
thick section. While Fig. 22. shows martensite in the thick uniformity. Generally, the ambient temperature in the bore of
section of HTC400 and HTC100, martensite in HTC400 only the geometry under study would be higher than other surfaces,
began forming after it had progressed a substantial amount due to radiant surfaces facing each other. The second and third
around the bore. HTC1000, on the other hand, had martensite rows of Table 4 show the out-of-round distortion results of the
transforming in the thick section before it had progressed bore if the ambient temperature of the bore was 1.5 and 2 times
halfway around the bore in the core, as shown in Fig. 21. higher than the outer diameter and end faces, respectively. The
HTC is the same for all surfaces. The increase in ambient
Figure 23 shows the process as it is completing. It is worth temperature essentially slows down the heat transfer through
noting the difference between HTC400 and HTC1000. HTC400 the bore wall and has a minimal effect on the total out-of-round
has a shallow gradient in the thick section from the surface to distortion compared to the situation where the ambient
the core. This means there is a large amount of volume temperature is the same for all surfaces.
transforming in the thick section all at once, acting to stretch the
hole in the horizontal direction, after the material around the A uniform HTC on all surfaces of this geometry is also highly
bore had already transformed. HTC1000, on the other hand, has unlikely in actual practice. There are two scenarios possible.
a steep transformation gradient and has much less material to First, air has a difficult time moving through the bore and the
transform before completion. This is due to the transformation HTC in the bore is reduced compared to the other surfaces. The
in the thick and thin sections occurring simultaneously. fourth row in Table 4 shows the results if the HTC in the bore
is 0.5 times the HTC applied to other surfaces. Like the
increased ambient temperature, this boundary condition acts to
235

by guest
slow the heat transfer through the bore wall and also has a Conclusions
minimal effect on the distortion compared to a uniform HTC.
In the second scenario, a chimney effect is created through the From the study presented here, as well as from Table 4 and Fig.
bore and the HTC in the bore is higher than the other surfaces. 24, it becomes clear that there is no easy way to determine a
This is quite common in actual practice. The last two rows in suitable gas pressure and velocity profile when turning to high
Table 4 show the out-of-round results if the HTC is 1.5 and 2 pressure gas quenching to reduce distortion in difficult to
times greater than the HTC on other surfaces, respectively. The quench geometries. While an understanding of the mechanisms
ambient temperature is the same for all surfaces. The increased responsible for particular distortion modes of certain geometric
HTC value acts to increase the heat transfer through the bore features is critical in the decision-making process, the ability to
wall and reduces the out-of-round distortion of the bore evaluate numerous conditions before any parts are processed
compared to the uniform HTC. should not be underestimated.
Table 4: Comparison of predicted out-of-round distortion of The out-of-round distortion, and any shape change distortion, is
bore for various boundary conditions on bore surface. mainly due to the nonuniform, solid-state phase
transformations, both to and from austenite, with the thermal
HTC400 Bore BC effects having a marginal effect on the distortion. If
nonuniformities cannot be avoided, due to geometric features,
Condition Out-of-round, μm the slowest rate possible should not automatically be considered
Uniform HTC and Equal to result in the least amount of distortion. Finite element
319
Ambient Temperature modeling of the heat treatment process, using software such as
1.5X Ambient Temperature 313 DANTE, can help the engineer choose the proper gas
quenching process parameters to ensure mechanical properties
2.0X Ambient Temperature 327 are achieved while keeping distortion to an absolute minimum.
0.5X HTC 310
1.5X HTC 285
2.0X HTC 249
References
[1] V. Heuer, K. Loser, and D.R. Faron, “Low Distortion Heat

Another difficult to quench geometry is shown in the inset of
Treatment of Transmission Components”, AGMA Technical
Fig. 24. This geometry cools much faster on the side with the
Paper, October 2010.
fins, due to the increased surface area provided by the fins. This
[2] Tim Yu, Tony Yu, and D. Herring, “Low-Pressure
geometry also has a nonlinear distortion response to uniform
Carburizing and High Pressure Gas Quenching”, Heat Treating
heat transfer coefficients in the range of HPGQ, as shown in
Progress, September/October 2003, p 37-41.
Fig. 24. The distortion evaluated for this case was bow
[3] Z. Li, “Heat Treatment Response of Steel Fatigue Sample
distortion of the coupon in the longitudinal direction. This is an
During Vacuum Carburization and High Pressure Gas
example that shows that nonlinear responses to high pressure
Quenching Process”, Proceedings of MSEC2015, Charlotte,
gas quenching is not unique to the geometry presented in the
NC, June 2015.
study but exists in most difficult to quench geometric features.
110
out-of-round distortion, μm
105
100
95
90
85
80
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
HTC, W/m2K
Figure 24: Predicted bow distortion of finned coupon, shown in

the insert, as a function of the heat transfer coefficient.
236

by guest
ISSUE FOCUS ///
AEROSPACE APPLICATIONS / CERTIFICATIONS
LOW PRESSURE
CARBURIZATION
MODELING
WITH CARBIDE FORMATION
AND DISSOCIATION
26 OCTOBER 2020
With the advent of high-strength steels for the aerospace industry,
most of which contain substantial amounts of strong carbide-
forming elements such as chromium, molybdenum, and vanadium,
the LPC process can be extremely challenging to control.
By JUSTIN SIMS
Low pressure carburization (LPC) processes are becom-
L ing more widespread throughout industry due to the

reduced cycle times and the control over the carbon
profile through the case of the carburized component.
Unlike gas carburization, which uses a constant carbon potential
to maintain the available carbon on the part surface at a specific
value, LPC uses boost and diffuse steps. A boost step involves the
temporary addition to the furnace of a carbon-carrying gas, usually
acetylene, to increase the surface carbon to the saturation limit of
austenite. If not properly controlled, the carbon available for dif-
fusion can well exceed the saturation limit, creating unfavorable
carburizing conditions.
After a requisite amount of time has passed — generally one to
several minutes — the carbon-carrying gas is evacuated from the
chamber. The carbon that was deposited on the surface during the
boost step is then allowed to diffuse into the part, reducing the
surface carbon. These two steps are then repeated until the required
case depth and carbon profile are achieved. Figure 1: Experimental vs. prediction for Ferrium C64.
AEROSPACE CHALLENGES capability and was used to fit the diffusivity and primary carbide
For steel alloys that do not contain a significant amount of strong kinetics of Ferrium C64 steel alloy from LPC experiments.
carbide forming elements, this process can be relatively easy to LPC experiments were conducted whereby 4-inch diameter cyl-
control. However, with the advent of high-strength steels for the inders made of Ferrium C64 were subjected to three different LPC
aerospace industry, most of which contain substantial amounts of cycles with the only difference in the cycles being the final diffuse
strong carbide-forming elements such as chromium, molybdenum, time. Each run used a progressively longer final diffuse time. Carbon
and vanadium, the LPC process can be extremely challenging to measurements were made using a LECO burn. Unfortunately, this
control. These elements bond with the carbon deposited on the method of carbon analysis gives no indication as to the amount
surface to form primary carbides, which, if not properly dissolved, of carbon in solid solution and the amount of carbon in primary
can damage fatigue performance. Long boost times, as well as very carbide form.
short diffuse times, can lead to the thermodynamic stabilization Regardless, the data was fit to diffusivity and primary carbide for-
of these primary carbides. mation/dissolution kinetics parameters used in the DANTE carburi-
While Fick’s Second Law describes the diffusion of carbon through zation model and compared to the experimental data. The results
a low-alloy steel with reasonable accuracy, the same is not true of are shown in Figure 1. As can be seen, the match between prediction
medium- and high-alloy steels. This is due to the presence of primary and experiment is reasonable, with a significant amount of scatter
carbides forming and dissolving during the LPC process. When the in the experimental data. With the ability to predict carbon diffu-
boost step is occurring, the primary carbides take carbon away from sion and carbide formation/dissociation, the DANTE model can now
the austenite solution, allowing more carbon to enter the solid solu- be used to predict and design LPC schedules for Ferrium C64 steel.
tion from the surface. During the diffuse step, as the carbon that is in
solid solution diffuses into the part effectively reducing the carbon CASE STUDY
in austenite, the primary carbides can dissolve to provide more car- The following is a case study for the redesign of an LPC schedule for
bon to the solid-state solution. If the primary carbides are not allowed a ring gear using the DANTE heat-treatment simulation software.
to fully dissolve or shrink to a significantly small amount before the The original LPC schedule, consisting of six boost-diffuse steps, was
next boost step begins, they will continue to grow. producing too many primary carbides during the process, and, as
a consequence, rolling contact fatigue performance was very poor.
PRIMARY CARBIDE FORMATION AND DISSOLUTION Since the carbon potential should act uniformly around the cir-
In order to properly predict the carbon profile of medium- and high- cumference of the gear and each tooth should behave the same
alloy steels, the primary carbide formation and dissolution must be with respect to carbon diffusion, only a single tooth was modeled.
considered. The heat-treatment simulation software DANTE has this Figure 2 shows the full CAD model of the gear (left), the single
thermalprocessing.com 27
tooth meshed model (center), and a closeup of the gear tip corner
mesh (right). An extremely fine surface layer of elements is required
to capture the steep chemical gradient that exists near the surface
during an LPC process. Only the cross-section is shown, though the
gear does have a height. The gear has a 5.5-inch outer diameter, a
4.5-inch inner diameter, a 0.60-inch height, and 40 teeth. The gear is
made of Ferrium C64 with a base carbon of 0.1%. The model contains
233,850 hexagonal linear elements and 245,055 nodes.
The case depth was originally designed for 0.75 mm on the flank
of the tooth, with a carbon value of 0.3% resulting in a hardness
value of 50 HRC for Ferrium C64 when tempered at 495°C. Figure Figure 2: CAD model (left), single tooth meshed model (center), and close-up of
3 shows a plot of the carbon in the austenite matrix (carbon) and tooth tip edge fine mesh (right).
the carbon in primary carbide form (carbon in carbide) from the
surface of the flank toward the core. As can be seen, a great deal of
carbon is tied up in primary carbide form — approximately 0.75%.
These primary carbides, if not dissolved either during a reheating
process to form austenite or at the end of the carburization cycle,
can be extremely detrimental to fatigue performance. Figure 3 also
shows that the case is deeper than it needs to be, at 1.1mm.
An added benefit of using simulation software like DANTE to
design LPC schedules is the ability to witness the effect of each indi-
vidual boost-diffuse step. It is therefore possible to know when to
reduce the boost time to avoid large primary carbide formation and
how long to diffuse to ensure the primary carbides are dissolved to
a sufficiently small size. Most medium- and high-alloy steels will
form primary carbides during the boost step, regardless of the time.
So, it is important to allow enough carbon to enter the part before Figure 3: Carbon in the austenite matrix and carbon in primary carbide form for
beginning the diffuse step. the baseline process from the surface of the flank.
Controlling the length of the diffuse step then becomes critical
in ensuring the primary carbides have properly dissolved before
beginning the next boost step. Figure 4 shows the predicted carbon
in the austenite matrix (carbon) and the carbon in primary carbide
form (carbon in carbides) at the surface of the flank for the baseline
model over the total time of the process. As can be seen, the carbon
in primary carbide form continues to increase as the process pro-
gresses. The long final diffuse begins to allow for decomposition,
but the time is not long enough.
Figure 4 also indicates that the diffuse times are much too short,
as the carbon in carbide does not dissociate back into the austenite
matrix, but remains more than 1.0% for most of the process. The
boost times seem reasonable, since the carbon in primary carbide
form rises approximately 1.2%. This is reasonable for Ferrium C64,
as the high level of chromium causes rapid formation of primary Figure 4: Carbon in the austenite matrix and carbon in primary carbide form for
the baseline process on the surface of the flank for the total process time.
carbides. The important insight gained from Figure 4 is that the dif-
fuse times are far too short to properly dissolve the primary carbides dissolving to a minor fraction of a percent. Comparing to Figure 4,
back into solid-state solution. this matches the first two boost steps, but the baseline carbon in
primary carbide form contained 1.8% carbon in later boost steps. So,
A NEW SCHEDULE the redesign had a significant effect on primary carbide formation.
To ensure the primary carbides dissolve completely before harden- The baseline model also showed the surface carbon near 1.0%,
ing, a new schedule was developed with the aim of reducing the car- which is much higher than what is needed to reach a hardness of
bon in primary carbide form. To reach this goal, three boost-diffuse 60 HRC. For Ferrium C64, a surface carbon of 0.55% is sufficient
steps were removed, and the diffuse times increased substantially. to reach a surface hardness of 60 HRC after tempering at 495°C.
This increase in diffuse time added approximately one-half hour to Therefore, the surface carbon was also reduced in the redesigned
the schedule, which is acceptable given the positive results. Figure schedule. Figure 6 shows the carbon in the austenite matrix (carbon)
5 shows the predicted carbon in the austenite matrix (carbon) and and the carbon in primary carbide form (carbide) from the surface of
the carbon in primary carbide form (carbon in carbide) for the total the flank toward the core for the redesigned schedule. By reducing
process time at the same surface location on the flank as Figure 4 the surface carbon, this material was able to meet the required hard-
for the baseline LPC schedule. ness, case depth, and avoid significant primary carbide formation
As can be seen in Figure 5, the primary carbides now have time during the LPC process. The carbon in primary carbide form on the
to dissolve during each diffuse step and are nearly eliminated by surface can now be easily removed with a light finishing operation,
the final diffuse step. It is also interesting to note that the carbon whereas a significant amount of grinding would have been required
in primary carbide form rises to 1.3% during each boost step before to remove the primary carbide layer from the baseline process.
28 OCTOBER 2020
CONCLUSION
It has been shown that it is possible to model a low-pressure carburi-
zation process, including the formation and dissociation of primary
carbides using the DANTE heat-treatment simulation software. The
primary carbide kinetics can be determined through fitting experi-
mental data to model parameters that include diffusivity of carbon
in austenite and the formation and dissociation of primary carbides.
In this case, LPC experiments were conducted on Ferrium C64
cylinders, and parameters inside the DANTE carburization model
were fit from the experimental data. The model was then used
to redesign an LPC schedule for a gear component. It was shown,
through modeling, that the original schedule was producing too
many primary carbides and also had a surface carbon that was too
Figure 5: Carbon in the austenite matrix and carbon in primary carbide form for high. A schedule was then successfully redesigned using DANTE in
the redesigned process on the surface of the flank for the total process time.
which the surface carbon was reduced to 0.55% and the primary
carbides reduced to a small amount in a shallow surface layer. The
same procedure of conducting LPC experiments and fitting the data
to a model that includes carbon diffusivity through austenite and
the formation/dissociation of primary carbides can be applied to
any medium- or high-alloy steel.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Justin Sims is a mechanical engineer with Dante Solutions, where he
is an analyst of steel heat-treat processes and an expert modeler of
quench hardening processes using Dante software. Project work includes
development and execution of carburization and quench hardening
Figure 6: Carbon in the austenite matrix and carbon in primary carbide form for simulations of steel components and analysis of heat-treat racks and fixtures.
the redesigned process from the surface of the flank. He has a mechanical engineering degree from Cleveland State University.
QUICK DELIVERY HFL-4252-2IQ

Ready for immediate delivery!
VACUUM FURNACES This furnace was previously installed in
a customer’s facility, fully tested and
accepted, but was never placed into
service, therefore it is like-new and is in
excellent condition.
• Graphite insulated hot zone

• Work zone: 26”W x 26”H x 52”D
• Weight capacity up to 1,800 pounds
• Temperature uniformity ±10°F between
500°F to 2150°F
• Operating temperature up to 2400°F
267.384.5040 | sales@solarmfg.com | solarmfg.com PROUDLY MADE IN THE USA
thermalprocessing.com 29
Thermal Processing in Motion 2018—Conference Proceedings of the Thermal Processing in Motion Copyright © 2018 ASM International®
June 5-7, 2018, Spartanburg, South Carolina, USA All rights reserved
L. Ferguson, L. Frame, R. Goldstein, D. Guisbert, D. Scott MacKenzie, editors www.asminternational.org
Low Pressure Carburizing Cycle Determination for High Alloy Steels

Zhichao Li, B. Lynn Ferguson, Tianyu Yu, and Justin Sims
DANTE Solutions, Inc.
7261 Engle Road, Suite 105
Cleveland, OH 44130
USA
(440) 234-8477 Charlie.Li@dante-solutions.com
Abstract Comparing Gas Carburizing and Low Pressure

Carburizing
High hardenability steels with high alloy content typically
contain strong carbide forming elements such as chromium Since both conventional gas carburizing and low pressure
and molybdenum. During carburization, alloys with high carburizing diffuse carbon into the target components, how are
amounts of strong carbide formers may form stable carbides they different? The answer focuses on what happens at the
on or near the surface during carburization that can effectively surface of the part.
block carbon diffusion and retard the carburization process.
This is especially true for low pressure carburization where the Gas Carburization: Figure 1 is a graphical representation of
surface carbon content can rise quickly as the carbon source what happens during gas carburization.[1] A carbon potential,
gas dissociates on the hot part surface. To get carbon CP, exists within the furnace chamber due to the gas
penetration into the part and achieve the desired case depth, composition, which incidentally is at one bar pressure or just
the low pressure carburization process must consist of a series slightly over one bar as a positive pressure is maintained in the
of boost and diffusion steps in order to control the surface furnace. The base carbon of the steel part, C0, is lower than
carbon content and the amount of carbides that are present. At the gas carbon potential, so carbon is deposited on the part
issue is how to determine an acceptable carburization schedule surface, where it then diffuses into the part. As the surface
in terms of boost and diffusion step times. This presentation reaction continues, a boundary layer, β, exists as the
will discuss a methodology used to develop a proper low neighboring gas carbon potential is reduced. DC is the
pressure carburizing schedule for these high alloy steels. This diffusion coefficient of carbon in the steel. With time, the
methodology involves experiments to determine carbon surface carbon level, CS, increases, and the carbon level within
diffusion rates, carbide formation kinetics, and carbide the steel increases. The process takes time, typically six or
dissolution kinetics, and computer simulation of the process. more hours, depending on the desired depth of case, process
temperature, etc. A key is that the atmosphere carbon
Introduction potential does not exceed the maximum solubility of carbon in
the austenitized steel.
The power transmission gear industry, especially aerospace
applications, has been pushed to increase power density of the
transmission for improved acceleration, load capacity, and
extended life. In addition, the safety issue of performing for
extended time under poor lubrication conditions where gear
temperatures are high and resistance to softening is required
are especially important for military applications.
Consequently, the gear industry has turned to carburizing
grades of ultrahigh strength steels. These steels have high
alloy content, with reliance on strong carbide forming elements
such as chromium and molybdenum, such that they exhibit
secondary hardening during tempering at relatively high
temperatures, i.e. ~500° C. Examples of these steels include
alloys such as Pyrowear 53, Pyrowear 675, Ferrium C64, and
CSS-422L, and their nominal chemistries are given in Table 1.
The high amounts of the strong carbide forming elements Figure 1: Graphic representation for gas carburization.[1]
affect the carburization process.
This description is simplistic, but the key is maintaining the
surface carbon level below the saturation level so that carbides
do not form. The furnace response is slow, so a carbon
263
potential that is too high will result in massive carbides in the D(T,C)=0.47*exp[-1.6*C]*exp[-(37000-6600*C)/R/T] (2)
final product that will degrade performance.
D(T,C)=(0.04+0.08*C)*exp[-31350/R/T] (3)
From Table 1, steel alloys that are gas carburized have levels
of strong carbide formers, other than iron, that total less than 1 D(T,M,C)=(0.146-0.036*C*(1-1.075*Cr)+Σk1*M)*
weight percent. With typical carburizing temperatures of 900 exp[-(144.3-15.0*C+0.37*C2+Σk2*M)/R/T] (4)
C to 950 C (1650 F to 1750F), gas atmosphere carbon
potentials typically range from 0.8% to 1.3%, with the lower where T is temperature, °K,
values being more common. As the alloy content increases, as C is weight percentage of carbon,
for 9310 steel, the carbon potential may be adjusted from high k1 and k2 are multiplying factors for specific elements,
at the beginning of the process, to a lower value for the M is weight percentage of Mn, Si, Ni, Cr, Mo, or Al,
remainder of the process to help guard against carbide R is the universal gas constant, 1.986 cal/mol/°K, and
formation. Steps like preoxidation may be added to the RkJ is the gas constant expressed as kJ/mol/°K.
process to further reduce the potential for alloy carbide
formation and allow greater carbon diffusion into the base These equations are valid within particular chemistry ranges,
metal. as discussed in references [3] for eq.(2), [4] for eq.(3), and [5]
for eq.(4). A graphical comparison of these equations is
Table 1: Carburizing Steels Showing Base Carbon Level and shown in Figure 2, where it is obvious that diffusion
Amount of Strong Carbide Forming Elements. coefficient increases markedly with temperature, and also with
carbon content. What is not as clear is the effect that alloying
Alloy %C %Cr %Mo %V Other elements, especially chromium, have on carbon diffusion.
Typical AISI 1020 0.2 - - -
Carburiz- AISI 4120 0.2 0.5 0.17 -
ing Steel AISI 4320 0.2 0.5 0.25 -
Grades AISI 5120 0.2 0.8 - -
AISI 8620 0.2 0.5 0.2 -
Historic AISI 9310 0.1 1.2 0.12 -
Aerospace
Gear Steel
High Pyrowear 53 0.1 1.0 3.0 2.0 Mn,
Strength Si, Cu
Carburizi Pyrowear 0.07 13.0 1.8 0.6 Co
ng Steels 675
Ferrium C64 0.11 3.5 1.75 - Co,
W
CSS-422L 0.12 14.0 4.75 0.6 Co
M50NiL 0.12 4.5 4.0 1.2 Ni
Vasco X2-M 0.15 5.0 1.4 0.5 Mn,
Si
Figure 2: Calculated diffusion coefficient as a function of
The equations used to predict the development of the carbon percentage at three temperatures, 800 C, 950 C and
carburized case in terms of time, temperature, and atmosphere 1100 C. ‘T’is for eq.(2), ‘W&M’ is for eq.(3), and ‘CSM’ is
carbon potential are quite simple, as differences between for eq. (4).
boundary diffusion and bulk diffusion are not considered and
carbon potential is held below austenite saturation level. Low Pressure Carburization: Low pressure carburization,
Because the gas carburizing times are long, i.e. several hours, as the name implies, is conducted in vacuum furnaces at
the full carbon potential is immediately applied to the surface pressures of about 0.1 to 1 torr. During heating to the
of the part. The well known Harris equation can be used to carburizing temperature, a nonreactive gas such as nitrogen
calculate total case depth for gas carburization[2]: may be added to provide convection to speed heating through
Case depth = f * √t (1) the lower temperatures where radiation is less effective. As
where t is time is hours and f is a temperature dependent factor the temperature increases, the parts must be protected from
that is related to diffusion. Notice that there is no relation to surface oxidation, so the vacuum must be below 0.1 to 0.3 torr.
different modes of diffusion (boundary or bulk), and there is A partial pressure of a “surface cleaning” gas such as hydrogen
no provision for alloy effects. Yet, this equation works fairly may be added during this stage to make the steel alloy more
well for the commonly carburized grades of carbon and low receptive to carbon absorption. Once the parts have been
alloy steel. heated to the desired temperature, carburization commences as
a series of boost and diffuse steps. For reasons discussed
Many equations for carbon diffusion coefficient in iron and below, the boost steps are short, typically less than two
low alloy steels have been published. Three equations for minutes, and the diffuse steps may be initially similar time, but
diffusion coefficient D expressed as cm2/s are: become progressively longer as the case develops.
264
Acetylene (C2H2) is commonly used as the carbon source gas.
During a boost step, the hydrocarbon gas may be blended with
another gas such as nitrogen or hydrogen to assist mixing of
the hydrocarbon gas in the vacuum chamber. The boost pulse
time, gas flows and chamber pressure for two similar furnaces
but of different sizes are shown in Figure 3 a and b. Due to
size differences, the effective gas flows and chamber pressure
are different for a boost step with the same common aim.
Figure 4: Portion of Fe-C equilibrium phase diagram.[6]
(a) Boost step for furnace A.
(b) Boost step for furnace B.

Figure 3. Comparison of boost steps for furnaces of similar
design but different sizes.
Figure 5: Isopleth from Fe-Cr-C ternary phase diagram for
Carbon Solubility and Alloy Chemistry: The equilibrium 5% Cr.[6]
phase diagram changes as the chromium content is increased,
with the austenite field becoming smaller.[6] A section of the increased difficulty of avoiding carbide formation during
Fe-C phase diagram is shown in Figure 4 and for comparison, carburization as carbon is added to steels with higher
an isopleth for the Fe-C-Cr ternary phase diagram for 5% Cr is chromium content. Reference [7] reports that chromium
shown in Figure 5. In Figure 4, austenite saturation with effectively decreases the diffusion of carbon in steel, and this
carbon does not occur at carburizing temperatures until the is largely a result of the strong affinity of chromium for
carbon level exceeds about 1.5%C. At higher temperatures, carbon. Table 1 shows that austenite stabilizers such as Ni
even more carbon can be held in solution in austenite. Figure and/or Co are often used in high Cr and Mo steels to
5 for 5%Cr shows that the austenite phase field is smaller at counteract the shrinkage of the austenite phase field.
this Cr level, and the eutectoid composition is also decreased.
The reduced size and shift of the austenite zone means that For high strength steels, the carburization must be tightly
austenite will saturate at lower carbon levels in steels with controlled because the austenite phase field exists under tighter
higher chromium content than in steels with lower chromium bounds of temperature and carbon level. The simple equation
content, and alloy carbides can more readily form. For steels mentioned to calculate case depth no longer holds, as the
with yet high chromium content, such as P675, the austenite possible formation of carbides greatly affects carbon diffusion,
field is indeed small and the potential for alloy carbide with carbide formation at part surfaces effectively blocking
formation is high. The possibility of forming many types of carbon diffusion.[8] The carburizing process must be
carbides becomes widely spread over the elevated temperature designed with carbide formation in mind. While this is also
range. While these diagrams are for equilibrium and true for gas carburizing, it is especially critical for low
carburizing is a transient process, the diagrams show the pressure carburizing.
265
The carbon source in low pressure carburizing is a gas or mix
of gases that dissociate at the hot part surface to deposit
carbon. The carbon source gas dissociates directly on the hot
part surfaces, instantly providing carbon that is available to
diffuse into the steel. Investigators have reported that the gas
dissociation first decays the gas molecules to intermediate
radical forms that then breakdown to crystalline
graphite.[9,10] Hydrogen gas is typically the other product of
the dissociation. This pure carbon then diffuses into the steel,
with diffusion down grain boundaries superseding diffusion
into austenite grains. The concentration of carbon in grain
boundaries promotes carbide formation if the gas dissociation
reaction is allowed to continue for too long of time or if the
partial pressure of carrier gas is too high (too much Figure 6: Example LPC schedule followed in one trial run.
dissociation). If this boost time is too long for the amount of
carbon gas present, surface carbides will form that block Table 2. Trial LPC Schedule.
carbon diffusion, eventually causing soot and even tar to form.
Hence, a short, controlled boost time is typical, meaning the Step Step Time, min. Total Time, min.
partial pressure of the carbon source gas is reduced to allow Boost 1 1.25 1.25
time for any minute carbides that formed to dissolve and
Diffuse 1 18.0 19.25
carbon diffusion to occur to reduce the surface carbon level.
Boost 2 0.75 20.0
Once sufficient diffusion has occurred, the carbon source gas
Diffuse 2 20.0 40.0
is reintroduced and the boost step scenario repeats. As the
Boost 3 0.75 40.75
process continues, the boost times remain short and the diffuse
step times increase since the surface austenite saturates and Diffuse 3 25.0 65.75
more time is needed to lower the surface and near-surface Boost 4 0.75 66.50
carbon levels by diffusion. Diffuse 4 40.0 106.50
Boost 5 0.75 107.25
Experiments were run using acetylene as the carbon source gas Diffuse 5 55.0 162.25
and Ferrium C64 alloy steel to characterize the low pressure Boost 6 0.75 163.0
carburization process. Final Diffuse 25.0 188.0
Experimental Results and Discussion

metallographically prepared mounted sections for comparison
Low pressure carburization trials were run using cylinders with against the carbon weight percentages.
a diameter of ~100 mm. LPC tests were conducted following
different boost & diffuse schedules and temperatures to Hardness and carbon profiles determined for four different
generate different carbon and hardness profiles in these trial runs are plotted in Figure 7. The relationship between
cylinders. Using the combinations of profiles and LPC hardness and carbon level for a martensite microstructure for
schedules, carbon diffusion was characterized for Ferrium C64 is not published. However, the published data sheet for
C64. An example trial schedule is shown graphically in Figure C64 reports that the Jominy hardness is HRC 43 and that
6, and Table 2 lists the times for this series of boost-diffuse typical core hardness values in carburized parts should be
steps. By no means is this schedule presented as a preferred HRC 47 to 50.[10] From Figure 7, the measured
schedule. microhardness of HRC 45 at a depth of 2 mm should be at the
base carbon level of 0.11%. Runs 1-3 were at a carburizing
The procedure for determining the carbon profile was to temperature of 1000° C, and run 4 was conducted at a
carefully machine a 0.05 mm layer from the cylinder using a temperature of 940° C. The boost total time was the same for
sharp single point lathe cutter while collecting the chips. By all runs, but the total diffuse time increased from run 1 to run
sequentially doing this, individual bags of chips with different 3, with the diffuse time for run 4 being the same as that of run
carbon content were collected. Then, each segregated 2. Observations from Figure 6 are that longer diffuse total
collection of chips was subjected to LECO testing to determine time gave deeper penetration of carbon, and that the higher
the carbon content. This is not a fool-proof method, but with carburization temperature of 1000° C gave a deeper case than
care, the results are accurate. A major problem to avoid is the lower 940° C carburizing temperature. These observations
overheating of the chips and/or bar during single point turning, are as expected, and they are more easily observed from the
which would result in reduced carbon measurement for that hardness data. While the carbon data shows the general trend
sample set. Microhardness measurements were taken on
266
Figure 9 shows results for a computer simulation that had nine
boost and diffuse steps for a LPC run. There are two curves
each for two locations, position 501 on the surface and
position 492 at a depth of 0.25 mm below the surface. The
solid lines are carbon weight fraction predictions, and the
dashed lines are normalized carbide size predictions. This
boost-diffuse schedule is predicted to produce carbides at the
surface that form during the first boost and persist through the
entire LPC process. The subsurface location is predicted to
form carbides during the last long diffuse step, but these
dissolve. From the plot, carbide formation is predicted to
occur when the carbon weight fraction hits 0.010. To prevent
any carbide formation, the carbon weight fraction should
remain below this level for the steel properties used in this
Figure 7: Hardness and carbon profiles measured for a LPC model. The emphasis on this last phrase is important as the
trial. plot in Figure 8 is not for C64, but it is for a competing high
strength steel alloy.
of being high at the surface and lower with depth from the
surface, it has a lot of variation and is more difficult to
interpret. Complicating the issue is the possibility of carbide
formation and interference with pure diffusion of carbon
through the austenite lattice during carburization.
Predicting the development of the final carbon profile must

include decisions about carbon saturation of austenite, possible
carbide formation and growth, carbide dissolution, and carbon
diffusion. Figure 8 shows a framework for such decision
making in determining a proper boost – diffuse schedule for an
LPC process. Material property data needed to simulate
carburization is shown in the block labeled ‘Steel Grade.’ The Figure 9: LPC simulation results for a high alloy steel that
carburization specification for part will have at a minimum the shows carbide formation and dissolution during a nine step
required case depth (usually hardness at a specified depth), boost – diffuse schedule.
surface hardness and core hardness. These may be specified at
particular location(s), and hardness is specified rather than
carbon level because it is much easier to measure. For
Summary
simulation, the part geometry must be known, and for LPC the
total surface area to be carburized should be known since the Modeling carburization of higher alloy content steels,
carbon source gas will dissociate on the surfaces of parts and especially alloys containing chromium contents well above
provide the amount of carbon needed to fulfill the case 1.0%, requires more than a simplified mass diffusion model.
requirement. Once the carrier gas type is specified, the Carbide formation, carbide growth and dissolution all can
calculations can be made to determine time to saturate impact the development of the carburized case. Low pressure
austenite at the carburization temperature, i.e. boost step, and carburization has the added complication of rapid carbon build
the time needed to diffuse carbon away from the surface, i.e. up on the part surface due to direct dissociation of the carbon
diffuse step. Then the number of boost and diffuse steps can source gas right on the hot part surface. However, this rapid
be determined to meet the specified case requirements. carbon build up brings with it the ability to more rapidly
develop a desired case and also the ability to tailor the shape
of the carbon profile. An accurate and comprehensive
simulation software gives the heat treater or part designer the
ability to take advantage of LPC capabilities while avoiding
the possible detriments of excessive surface and grain
boundary carbides or surface contamination by soot or tar.
Acknowledgments
The authors wish to acknowledge the support of the US Army
ADD for their support of this work and Solar Atmospheres,
Figure 8: Framework for LPC simulation software. Inc. for low pressure carburizing the test bars.
267
References
[1] Olga Karabelchtchikova, Fundamentals of Mass Transfer

in Gas Carburizing, Ph.D. Thesis, Worcester Polytechnic
Institute, 2007.
[2] F.E. Harris, Metals Progress, Vol. 44, pp265-272, 1943.
[3] G.G. Tibbetts, “Diffusivity of carbon in iron and steels at
high temperatures,” Journal of Applied Physics, Vol. 51,
pp 4813-4816, 1980.
[4] C. Wells and R. F. Mehl, Trans. AIME, Vol. 140, 279,
1940.
[5] .S.J. Lee, D. K. Matlock and C.J. van Tyne, “An
Empirical Model for Carbon Diffusion in Austenite
Incorporating Element Effects,” ISIJ Int., Vol. 51, No.
11, 2011, pp. 1903-1911.
[6] W.D. Forgeng and W.D. Foreng, Jr., “Carbon-
Chromium-Iron,” Metals Handbook, 8th Edition, vol. 8,
ASM, Metals Park, OH, 1973, pp 404.
[7] L. Nobili, P. Cavallotti and M. Pesetti, “Gas-Carburizing
Kinetics of a Low-Alloy Steel,” Metallurgical &
Materials Transactions A, v41A, February, 2010, pp
460-469.
[8] L. Zhang and R. Sisson, Jr., “Researchers Perfect
Carbon-Concentration Profile Predictions,” Industrial
Heating, vol. LXXXV No. 3, March 2017, pp 32-35.
[9] R. Gorockiewicz, A. Adamek, and M. Korecki, “The
LPC Process for High-Alloy Steels,” Gear Solutions,
September, 2008, pp 40-51.
[10] R. Gorockiewicz, “The kinetics of low-pressure
carburizing of alloy steels,” Vacuum, Vol. 86, pp 448-
451, 2011.
268
Heat Treat 2021: Proceedings of the 31st ASM Heat Treating Society Conference Copyright © 2021 ASM International®
September 14–16, 2021 All rights reserved.
America’s Center, St. Louis, Missouri, USA www.asminternational.org
DOI: 10.31399/asm.cp.ht2021p0263
Process to Minimize Distortion during High Pressure Gas Quenching Processes

Justin Sims, Zhichao (Charlie) Li, and B. Lynn Ferguson
DANTE Solutions, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, U.S.A.
justin.sims@dante-solutions.com
Jason Fetty
Combat Capabilities Development Command Aviation & Missile Center, Fort Eustis, Virginia, U.S.A.
Abstract
Traditionally, liquid quenchants were used to quench most steel
A gas quenching method was developed by DANTE Solutions, parts to obtain a martensitic microstructure. Liquid quenchants
in conjunction with the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities undergo a unique phenomenon, comprised of three stages,
Development Command Aviation & Missile Center when a red-hot part is immersed into the liquid [1]. First, a thin
(DEVCOM AvMC), to control distortion in difficult to quench vapor film is formed around the red-hot part, with extremely
geometries. This new method addresses the nonuniform cooling slow heat transfer rates. Nucleate boiling commences as the
inherent in most gas quenching processes. A prototype unit was vapor blanket breaks down. Nucleate boiling results in the
constructed and tested with the aim of controlling the martensite fastest heat transfer due to a combination of the latent heat of
formation rate uniformity in the component being quenched. vaporization and aggressive convection. Convective cooling,
With the ability of the DANTE Controlled Gas Quenching the final stage, begins as the nucleate boiling subsides [2].
(DCGQ) unit to control the temperature of the quench gas
entering the quench chamber, thermal and phase transformation The continually changing heat transfer rates associated with
gradients are significantly reduced. This reduction in gradients liquid quenching can severely affect the cooling uniformity of
yields a more uniform phase transformation, resulting in a given part. First, the breakdown of the vapor blanket rarely
reduced and predictable distortion. Being able to minimize and occurs evenly on all part surfaces, being dependent on the part
predict distortion during gas quenching, post heat treatment surface temperature, local flow behaviour, and the liquid
finishing operations can be reduced or eliminated, and as such, properties, creating brief periods of nonuniform heat transfer.
fatigue performance can be improved. This paper will discuss The chaotic nature of this phenomenon is difficult to predict and
the prototype unit performance. Mechanical testing and can lead to inconsistent distortion within a single load of parts.
metallographic analysis were also performed on Ferrium C64 Part geometry and immersion orientation also play a significant
alloy steel coupons and will be discussed. The results obtained role in nonuniform cooling when quenching in liquids [3 – 5].
showed that the slower cooling rate provided by the prototype
did not alter the microstructure, hardness, strength, ductility, High pressure gas quenching (HPGQ) does not involve a phase
toughness, or residual stress of the alloy. change of the quenching media, and therefore, has a more stable
heat transfer rate. However, due to its low density and specific
heat, gas is unable to absorb energy as well as liquids, and will
Introduction suffer a temperature change as heat is removed from the part.
Gases’ low density also make it more susceptible to local flow
variations. HPGQ equipment can also significantly contribute
Distortion can generally be divided into two categories: size to local flow variations [6].
change and shape change. Solid-state phase changes occurring
in steel alloys during thermal processing can result in In response to large distortion during HPGQ of complex
permanent size change, due to the difference between the geometries, DANTE Solutions devised a novel process, termed
starting microstructure and the microstructure after heat DANTE Controlled Gas Quenching (DCGQ), by which the
treatment. Size change is unavoidable but can easily be martensitic phase transformation is controlled during gas
predicted and accounted for in part design. Permanent shape quenching [7]. Since the transformation from austenite to
change is a result of nonuniform plastic strain, caused by martensite is driven by a reduction in temperature, and is not
nonuniform phase transformations, thermal strains, or creep time dependent like the diffusive phase transformations, the
while at high temperature, and is more difficult to predict and simplest way to control the martensite transformation is to
control. The nonuniformities can be a result of alloy control the rate of temperature change within the component.
segregation, uneven heating or quenching, poor support while By controlling the uniformity of martensitic transformation
at high temperature, thermal expansion or contraction throughout the part, distortion can be significantly reduced,
restrictions, or residual stresses from prior manufacturing easily predicted, and consistently reproduced. This paper will
operations. examine the DCGQ prototype unit design and operation.
Material property testing was also conducted, and discussed in
263

by guest
this paper, to show that a slowly transformed martensitic
structure was equivalent to a rapidly formed structure.
Equipment Description and Operation
Equipment Design and Construction

The DCGQ process was developed by DANTE Solutions after
hundreds of hours were spent evaluating DANTE quenching
models and determining temperature gradients which allowed
for minimal distortion of difficult to quench geometries,
generally encountered in power transmission applications. It
was determined that by maintaining a set temperature
difference between the fastest cooling point and the slowest
cooling point on a part, distortion could be significantly
reduced. If the temperature difference is kept sufficiently small,
shape change can be completely eliminated, and only the
resulting size change from the phase transformations is realized.
Atmosphere Engineering (now part of United Process

Controls), in Milwaukee, WI was contracted to design and
construct the DCGQ prototype unit, with specifications defined
by DANTE Solutions. The system includes a one (1) m3
working zone within the quench chamber, separate hot and cold
chambers for temperature manipulation of the quench gas, a
human machine interface (HMI) for system manipulation and
process monitoring, and custom program logic developed by
Atmosphere Engineering to follow time-temperature recipes by Figure 1: Front of the DCGQ prototype unit.
mixing gases from the hot and cold chambers.
Figure 1 shows the front of the quenching chamber, where the

parts are loaded. Figure 2 shows the back of the unit. The
electrical panel, with the HMI unit, is in the foreground of
Figure 2, with the cold chamber directly behind it, and the hot
chamber to its right. Figure 3 shows the HMI. The HMI allows
access to, and manipulation of, the system logic and parameters,
as well as being where recipes are entered, and processes
monitored. Shown in Figure 3 is the process monitoring
function, which allows the user to view the recipe setpoint and
the actual temperature of the gas entering the quench chamber,
while also monitoring the position of all the various valves
required to operate the equipment. The tables on the right of the
screen show the temperature values of several thermal couples
located within the chamber or thermocouples attached to a
quench probe or part.
Figure 2: Back of the DCGQ unit.
264

by guest
Figure 4 shows that the unit logic works well, and the system
has no issues following the prescribed time-temperature recipe.
The system did struggle a bit at lower temperatures, but still
maintained the process temperature within 5° C of the recipe
setpoint temperature, which was the tolerance programmed into
the unit.
Figure 5 shows the unit performance using a recipe with 25° C

temperature ramps over two minutes, with two-minute holds
between temperature reductions. Figure 6 shows the unit
performance using a recipe with a 100° C temperature reduction
over five minutes, with a 5-minute hold, followed by a 120° C
reduction over five minutes. In all three cases, Figures 4 – 6, the
unit performed exceptionally well.
Figure 3: Human Machine Interface on DCGQ prototype unit
showing process monitoring functionality.
Equipment Operation
The unit was constructed at Atmosphere Engineering and
shipped to Akron Steel Treating in Akron, OH, where it was
installed and tested. This first prototype unit requires heating to
be performed in a separate furnace, with the part transferred by
rail cart to the DCGQ unit after austenization is complete; future
production equipment should integrate controlled heating, as
well as cooling. The DCGQ unit is preheated to a predefined
temperature during the austenitization process in preparation
for quench; the preheat temperature is alloy and part geometry
dependent. The DCGQ recipe programmed into the HMI begins
once the front-loading door is closed. Figure 4 shows a
comparison of the temperature of the quench gas entering the
chamber (“Chamber Inlet PV”) and the recipe setpoint
temperature (“Chamber Inlet SP”) with no hot part in the
chamber. The recipe consists of 50° C temperature reductions
Figure 5: DCGQ Prototype unit temperature comparison
over two minutes, starting at 425° C, with twenty-minute holds
between quench gas entering the quench chamber and the
at each temperature step.
recipe setpoint temperature, with an empty chamber.

265

by guest
The three time-temperature recipes shown in Figures 4 to 6
represent schedules required for various geometries. For
geometries with a thin, uniform cross-sectional thickness, such
as rings, the designed temperature reductions can be relatively
large, and the ramp and hold times can be short, since the part
cools relatively quickly and uniformly. For thin geometries
with a slightly nonuniform cross-sectional thickness, such as
ring gears, temperature reductions should be kept small, due to
the mass differences in the part, but the ramp and hold times
can be relatively short, as the part will cool quickly. For parts
with significant unbalanced mass distributions, such as
crankshafts or eccentric bores, temperature reductions should Figure 7: (A) Quench probe used for DCGQ equipment
be kept small, and ramp and hold times should be long. characterization, and (B) DANTE model of the quench probe.
To reduce recipe design time, and ensure an optimal recipe is For DCGQ processes, the ambient temperature as a function of
achieved, with respect to distortion minimization and time is dependent on total mass, surface area, and initial
processing time, the equipment must be thermally characterized temperature, just as it is with HPGQ, but the ambient
so heat treatment simulation and design software, such as temperature for DCGQ is also dependent on the temperature
DANTE, can be used for DCGQ recipe design. The following ramp and hold times. Figure 8 shows the results of a
section describes the characterization of the DCGQ prototype comparative analysis between the setpoint and actual
unit. temperatures at the ends of the holds (left) and ramps (right) for
various DCGQ schedules. Ideally, to make design and analysis
Equipment Characterization of the DCGQ process simpler and more intuitive, the setpoint
To properly characterize the DCGQ prototype unit for and actual temperatures should be equal at the end of each
modeling and process design, or any other type of thermal temperature ramp and hold. For the processes shown in Figure
equipment, it is necessary to determine the heat transfer 8, HR4 and HR7 abide to this equality, but as the ramp and hold
coefficients (HTCs) and ambient temperatures acting on the times get shorter, these two temperatures begin to deviate; HR5
component being treated. For liquid quenching operations, the had the shortest ramp and hold times. This fact does not negate
convective HTC should be described in terms of part surface the use of modeling in recipe design, but rather solidifies the
temperature, due to the significant difference in heat transfer fact that processing equipment behavior should be thoroughly
between the vaporization, nucleate boiling, and convective understood, within normal operating conditions, if the process
stages of liquid quenching. The ambient temperature is assumed is to be modeled. Once the behavior is understood, it can be
to remain constant, due to liquids’ large specific heat and incorporated into the models for more accurate results.
overall volume in the quench vessel.
However, for gas quenching operations, it is assumed that the

convective HTC remains constant, since there is no phase
change associated with cooling in gas, and the ambient
temperature is a function of process time, due to gases’ low
specific heat (generally a magnitude less than liquids) and
volume in the quench vessel. The ambient temperature as a
function of time will vary for any single piece of gas quenching
equipment, operating at the same conditions, and is dependent
on the total mass being quenched, surface area of the load, and
the initial temperature of the load.
Figure 7(A) shows a cylindrical quench probe, made of AISI Figure 8: Relationship between recipe setpoint and ambient
304 stainless steel, used to characterize the DCGQ equipment. temperatures at the end of the Holds (left) and Ramps (right)
The cylinder has a 100 mm diameter and 100 mm height. There used for DCGQ recipe design and analysis.
are five holes drilled to mid-height, four approximately 3 mm
from the outer diameter and one in the center, which are fitted Figures 9 and 10 show time-temperature results comparing the
with K-type thermocouples. Thermocouples are also located in DANTE simulation, which used the single HTC and relevant
the DCGQ chamber at various distances from the probe to ambient temperatures determined from experiments, and the
measure the ambient temperature. Using the time-temperature actual time-temperature data. In addition to the two tests shown
history of the quench probe and recorded ambient temperature in this paper, five more recipes were executed, with their data
for a given DCGQ recipe, along with a DANTE model of the also used in characterizing the DCGQ equipment. Figures 9(A)
quench probe, shown in Figure 7(B), the HTC and ambient and 10(A), 1000° C to 400° C, and Figures 9(C) and 10(C), 400°
temperatures can be determined. C to 100° C, show the average temperature history for the near
surface thermocouples during the HR4 and HR5 tests and
DANTE simulation of these two tests. Figures 9(B) and 10(B),
1000° C to 400° C, and Figures 9(D) and 10(D), 400° C to 100°
266

by guest
C, show the temperature history for the core thermocouple high tempering temperature; since the martensite
during the HR4 and HR5 tests and DANTE simulation of these transformation occurs slowly using DCGQ, self-tempering may
tests. There is good agreement between simulation and occur during quench if the tempering temperature is less than
experimental results, with the tests not shown showing similar the martensite start temperature (MS). Further testing is needed
agreement. Each DANTE model of the DCGQ process used the to evaluate this effect. All comparative testing was performed
same HTC, but the ambient temperature varied depending on on identical coupons machined from one, 100 mm diameter bar.
the temperature ramp and hold times of the given recipe. For tests which required carburization, a single LPC process
was executed by Solar Atmospheres in Souderton, PA on all
coupons as one batch using a predefined LPC recipe. The
HPGQ coupons were processed first, at Solar Atmospheres, and
the austenitizing step was analyzed such that the time the
coupons spent in the austenite phase was noted and duplicated
with the DCGQ coupons. This was done to ensure any
additional carbon diffusion occurring during austenitizing was
similar between the two sets of coupons. All processed
coupons, DCGQ and HPGQ, were also subjected to cryogenic
and tempering treatments. The testing included, on carburized
coupons, microstructural evaluation, hardness, and residual
stress and on noncarburized coupons, tensile, impact strength,
and distortion.
Microstructural Evaluation
Previous experiments had been conducted on base carbon
Ferrium C64 prior to the design and construction of the DCGQ
Figure 9: Comparison of experimental and simulation results prototype unit to evaluate a slow transformation rate on C64’s
for one DCGQ recipe. microstructure. Those preliminary results showed no noticeable
difference between slowly and rapidly transformed martensitic
microstructures. Figure 11 shows the microstructure, magnified
1000X, of a carburized (A) DCGQ processed coupon and (B)
HPGQ processed coupon. As with previous experiments, there
is no discernable difference between the two microstructures.
The thin grey film on the DCGQ coupon is oxidized copper,
which was removed prior to testing. The microhardness profiles
for the coupons are shown in Figure 12 and confirm that the
slow transformation rate did not alter the microstructure of the
DCGQ processed coupons, compared to coupons processed
using a standard 2-bar HPGQ process.
Figure 10: Comparison of experimental and simulation results

for one DCGQ recipe.
Material Testing Results Figure 11: Microstructure of a carburized coupon processed

using (A) DCGQ and (B) HPGQ, magnified 1000X.
The previous section showed that the temperature of quench
gas, at atmospheric pressure, could be controlled within the
range of martensitic formation for high hardenability steels.
However, doubt still existed as to whether or not a martensitic
structure formed over such a long time period could perform as
well as a standard high pressure gas quenched structure.
Therefore, a testing program was launched to compare DCGQ
to a standard high pressure gas quenching process.
Ferrium C64 was chosen as the candidate alloy, due to its high
hardenability, use in high stress powertrain applications, and
267

by guest
Figure 12: Hardness profile comparison of carburized coupons
processed using DCGQ and HPGQ. Figure 13: Residual stress profile comparison of carburized
coupons processed using DCGQ and HPGQ.
Mechanical Testing
Tensile testing and Charpy V-notch impact testing were Bend fatigue testing was conducted during this work; however,
conducted at room temperature to compare the mechanical the results were impacted by surface oxidation on the DCGQ
properties of DCGQ processed C64 and HPGQ processed C64. bend fatigue coupons. The oxidation was caused by the DCGQ
Table 1 shows the results from these tests and reveal equivalent coupons requiring open air processing with the prototype unit
tensile and yield strengths, elongation and reduction of area, and was verified by SEM; production equipment can eliminate
and impact energy for Ferrium C64 processed using HPGQ and this problem by operating the process in a protective
DCGQ. These tests are promising, as they indicate that a slow atmosphere. Although the DCGQ coupons were copper plated,
martensitic transformation can be used for Ferrium C64 without the integrity of the copper was not maintained throughout the
degrading the microstructure or mechanical properties. complete cycle, with damage likely occurring during the
Materials with similar MS and tempering temperatures should 1000°C austenitizing step, and subsequently worsened during
also be suitable for DCGQ, though further testing is required. the 500° C tempering cycle. The DCGQ coupons which did not
fail after a few hundred cycles due to crack initiation at an
Table 1: Tension and Charpy impact results comparing DCGQ oxide, would runout with stress levels comparable to HPGQ.
and HPGQ processed Ferrium C64 coupons. Therefore, operating DCGQ under a protective atmosphere for
all processing steps, should not render a decrease in in-service
Tensile Yield Elong RA CVN performance compared to HPGQ processed components.
Strength Strength ation (%) Energy
(MPa) (MPa) (%) (J) The above discussion focused on showing that certain
DCGQ 1627 1405 17.75 71.2 25.35 materials, particularly those which are tempered at
HPGQ 1625 1401 16.75 71.0 24.00 temperatures below their MS, have the potential to acquire a
similar structure and properties after a relatively slow
Residual Stress and Distortion transformation from austenite to martensite, compared to a
Residual stress profiles for a carburized coupon were compared rapid transformation from austenite to martensite. However, the
between the two processes, at two locations, and are shown in benefit of DCGQ is its capability to significantly reduce and
Figure 13. There is no significant difference between the control distortion of difficult to quench geometries. One such
residual stress profiles. This, combined with the microstructural geometry was designed by DANTE Solutions to maximize
and mechanical property evaluations, bode well for fatigue nonuniform cooling and create large distortion. The coupon,
performance being similar between parts subjected to the two shown in Figure 14, was used to show the distortion reducing
different processes. capabilities of DCGQ compared to HPGQ.
Out-of-round distortion was the chosen mode of distortion to

evaluate, due to its ease of measurement. A 50 mm eccentric
bore was drilled through a disc having a 100 mm diameter and
100 mm height, creating a 6 mm thin section and 44 mm thick
section. A bore gauge is used to compare the measurements of
the bore at the location between the minimum and maximum
thicknesses and at 90° to this location. The two measurements
are made at five points along the height, as shown in Figure 14.
268

by guest
Conclusions
The DANTE Controlled Gas Quenching (DCGQ) process has

the potential to process difficult to quench part geometries
without the use of expensive press quench tooling and reduce
the amount of post-heat treatment processing required. The
work presented here concluded that it is possible to control the
temperature of quench gas entering a quench vessel, at
atmospheric pressure, in order to follow a time-temperature
recipe required to control the martensitic transformation rate in
high hardenability steel alloys. The prototype unit constructed
Figure 14: Eccentric bore coupon used to evaluate out-of- was able to achieve great control within the temperature range
round distortion, showing the two directions used to define out- of 400 – 100° C, using varying rates of temperature change. The
of-round (left) and the five axial measurement points (right). work further concluded that for Ferrium C64, the relatively
slow transformation rate from austenite to martensite did not
Two (2) eccentric bore coupons were processed using HPGQ alter the microstructure, mechanical properties, or residual
and two (2) using DCGQ. These coupons were processed stress when compared the current standard quenching process.
alongside the mechanical test coupons. The out-of-round Furthermore, DCGQ was shown to significantly reduce
distortion results for the four coupons at the five axial locations, distortion in a difficult to quench geometry when compared to
along with the average for each coupon, are shown in Table 2. HPGQ.
For the given geometry and distortion mode, DCGQ reduced
the distortion by 100 µm, or 50%, compared to HPGQ. This is Besides having the capability to significantly reduce distortion
significant, as the DCGQ recipe used was designed for the bend for difficult to quench part geometries, DCGQ has also been
fatigue coupon, which has a thinner and more uniform cross- shown, through the use of DANTE modeling, to be less
section. The recipe was designed as such to ensure testing was sensitive to nonuniform convective cooling conditions created
conducted using a DCGQ recipe representative of the geometry by equipment design. The DCGQ process can also result in
being tested. Slowing the DCGQ process down would yield less more dimensionally consistent components. All of DCGQ’s
distortion of the eccentric bore geometry. Regardless, a 50% benefits are a result of controlling the martensitic
reduction in distortion was achieved when compared to the transformation. By controlling the martensitic transformation
currently used processing conditions for Ferrium C64. throughout the part, it is possible to reduce the nonuniform
cooling effect created by geometry and equipment design,
Table 2: Out-of-round distortion results comparing DCGQ and ensuring that the transformation proceeds in a consistent way,
HPGQ processed Ferrium C64 coupons. part after part. Consistent and predictable distortion allows the
part’s pre heat treatment configuration to be redesigned such
that the post-heat treated shape is within design tolerances and
Axial Coupon Coupon Coupon Coupon
a minimal amount of post-heat treatment processing is required.
Position DCGQ DCGQ HPGQ HPGQ
4 (mm) 5 (mm) 1 (mm) 2 (mm)
1 0.11 0.09 0.15 0.23
2 0.09 0.11 0.21 0.21 Acknowledgments
3 0.07 0.11 0.23 0.21
4 0.08 0.12 0.22 0.20 The authors wish to acknowledge the U.S. Army Combat
5 0.11 0.09 0.25 0.23 Capabilities Development Command Aviation & Missile Center
AVERAGE 0.092 0.104 0.212 0.216 (DEVCOM AvMC) for their support of this work. The authors
also wish to acknowledge Solar Atmospheres for heat treating the
DANTE simulations have been conducted on various experimental coupons using LPC and HPGQ, Akron Steel
geometries, using various DCGQ recipes, and it has been shown Treating for hosting the prototype DCGQ unit and conducting the
that it is possible to design a DCGQ recipe which completely experiments using DCGQ, and Tensile Testing Metallurgical
eliminates the shape change distortion, with only the uniform Laboratory for mechanical property testing.
volumetric size change from the initial to final volume
microstructure occurring. Generally, this recipe takes too much References
time to be practical. However, the processing time can be
reduced to determine acceptable distortion and processing time; [1] Totten, G.E.; Bates, C.E.; Clinton, N.A.: Handbook of
the DCGQ recipe used to reduce distortion in the eccentric bore Quenchants and Quenching Technology. ASM, Ohio,
coupon by 50% was executed in one hour, where the recipe 1993.
resulting in no shape change of this geometry, determined by
DANTE modeling, requires seven hours to complete. [2] Boyer, Howard E. (Ed.); Quenching and Control of
Distortion. ASM, Ohio, 1988 p. 12 – 15.
[3] Banka, Andrew L.; Ferguson, B.L.; MacKenzie, D.
Scott: Evaluation of Flow Fields and Orientation
269

by guest
Effects Around Ring Geometries During Quenching. [6] Li, Z.; Ferguson, B.L.: Gas Quenching Process
Proceedings from the 26th ASM Heat Treating Society Optimization to Minimize Distortion of a Thin-Wall
Conference, Cincinnati, OH, USA. October 31 – Ring Gear by Simulation. HTM Journal of Heat
November 2, 2011. Treatment and Materials, Vol 68, No 1, 2013, p. 35 –
[4] Kobasko, N.I.; Aronov, M.A.; Ferguson, B.L.; Li, Z.: 41.
Local Film Boiling and Its Impact on Distortion of [7] Li, Zhichao (Charlie); Sims, Justin; Ferguson, B.
Spur Gears During Batch Quenching. Materials Lynn; Fetty, Jason; Baker, Treven: Minimizing
Performance and Characterization, Vol 1, No 1, 2012, Distortion During High Pressure Gas Quenching
p 1 – 15. Processes. Proceedings from the AHS International
[5] MacKenzie, D. Scott; Ferguson, B.L.; Li, Z.: Effect of 74th Annual Forum and Technology Display, Phoenix,
Quenching Variables on the Residual Stress and AZ, USA. May 14 – 17, 2018.
Distortion of a Heat Treated Disk. Proceedings from
the 23rd HTS Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
September 26 – 28, 2005.
270

by guest
Heat Treatment Process Modeling using DANTE
with Case Studies
Linking with ANSYS
DANTE Solutions, Inc.

7261 Engle Road, Suite 105
Cleveland, OH 44130
Date: February 2021
Copyright © 2021 by DANTE Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.

No part of this document may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any
form or by any means, without the prior written permission of DANTE Solutions, Inc.
DANTE Solutions – Customer References
Copyright © 2021 DANTE Solutions. All rights reserved. 6

DANTE Heat Treat Simulation Software
➢ DANTE is a commercial finite element based software tool for heat treatment
simulation validated for industrial processes
• Process design
• Process trouble shooting
• Design of experiments
➢ State-of-the-art mechanical and phase transformation kinetics models for use
with ANSYS Mechanical
➢ Heat Treatment Process Capabilities for Modeling:
• Carburizing; gas, low pressure • High pressure gas quench • Induction hardening
• Nitriding; gas, low pressure • Air cooling • Cryogenic treatments
• Heating; furnace, flame, laser, body • Spray quenching • Tempering; low and high
flux (induction/direct current) • Intensive quenching temperature
• Immersion liquid quenching; oil, • Press / fixture quenching • Normalizing
water, polymer

What is Required for an Accurate and Practically Useful
Heat Treating Model?
➢ Phase transformation models
➢ Multiphase mechanical models
➢ TRIP models
➢ Mixture law
➢ Tempering models
➢ Carburization models
➢ Nitriding models

DANTE Software - Function and Structure
➢ Heat transfer driven
➢ Diffusion, phase transformation, and
mechanical models included
➢ Standard material database includes
parameters for all models; no user
data required to model common
grades of steel
➢ Finite element based
➢ Outputs include volume fraction of
microstructural phases, dimensional
change, residual stress, and hardness
➢ Phases, dimensional change, and
stresses predicted in-process

Coupling of Carburization, Thermal, and Stress Models
Thermal and Stress Models can be
sequentially coupled or fully coupled
➢ Carburization model, thermal model, and stress ➢ Carburization model is sequentially coupled to
model are sequentially coupled. the fully coupled thermal and stress model
Carburization Model Carbon distribution

Carburization Model Carbon distribution
Thermal Temperature history

Thermal & Temperature history,
Model Distortion, Residual
Stress Model
Stress, and
Distortion, Residual Microstructure Phases.
Stress Model Stress, and
➢ Essential for large deformation processes, such
Microstructure Phases.
as hot stamping

DANTE Software - Models
➢ General form of phase transformation kinetics resident in DANTE
➢ Can be determined from Dilatometry or TTT diagrams
• Dilatometry data provides diffusive and martensitic transformation information
• Dilatometry data provides coefficient of thermal expansion and transformation strain
• No strain or martensitic transformation information from TTT diagrams
Dilatometry
➢ Internal state variable model used for the

mechanical model resident in DANTE
TTT / CCT
➢ Properties are a function of phase, carbon content,
temperature, strain, and strain rate
➢ Also includes mixture law
➢ Captures the hardening and recovery during a
quench hardening process
DANTE Software – Material Database
➢ DANTE comes standard with a material
database that contains the material ➢ Standard Steel Alloys
properties necessary to perform heat
treatment simulation
• Phase transformation properties
• Thermal / Mechanical properties
• Carbon diffusion properties
• Nitrogen diffusion properties
• Microstructural & alloy effects
➢ Using DANTE utility tools, materials can
easily be added to a customized ➢ Customized Steel Alloys
material database from experimental
data that is unique to each customer

Thermal Boundary Conditions are Critical
➢ DANTE Database has datasets for generic heat transfer coefficients for several processes
➢ Each system can behave differently, even identical equipment models
• DANTE offers advanced support for heating/quenching vessel characterization
➢ Three stages of liquid quenching: vapor, boiling, and convection
➢ Gas quenching: fluctuation in ambient gas temperature as a function of time
➢ Key to a successful model: Use actual process, equipment, and material that are employed in the actual part production
350
Boiling
Phase 300
Gas is heated
by hot part
250
Temperature, C
Gas is cooled by
200
heat exchanger
150
Initial gas
100
temperature
50
0
0 20 40 60 80 100
time, s
Example of ambient gas quench
Example of liquid quenchant HTC as a function of temperature
temperature as a function of time
Methods for Heat Transfer Characterization
Roll Body Roll Body 5”
Journal Surface Depth
Surface
Equiv. Test
Position
Schematic of 3-D 84” Roll

Model Construction, Showing
Locations of Interest
Core
Computational Fluid Dynamics

Quench Probe
Instrumented with
Thermocouples
Copyright © 2021 DANTE Solutions. All rights reserved.

Parts Instrumented with Thermocouples 17
Thermocouple Experiments
➢ For accurate HTC determination, thermocouples are attached to record heating and cooling steps
• In most cases, embedded thermocouples are preferred
• Finite Element model is developed to describe the thermocouple response effectively
• Thermocouples can be embedded in actual parts or simple cylinders
TC1
TC2
TC3

Characterization HPGQ Furnace using Thermocouples
➢ Cylinders embedded with

thermocouples were used to
characterize the severity of
nonuniform gas flow in high
pressure quenching chamber for:
• Different positions of the chamber
• Different locations in the cylinders
• Different locations in the rack
• Different load configurations
• Different load sizes

Example of Recorded Cooling Data from HPGQ Experiment
➢ Experimental data shows the

variation around the
circumference of the cylinder
➢ Latent heat effect on the time-
Latent Heat Effect due to
temperature is also evident Phase Transformation

Consequences of Gas Quench Relative to Liquid Quench
➢ Low mass of nitrogen gas vs. liquid means gas will heat up, but liquid heat up should be insignificant
• Tamb changes during gas quench, but can be ignored in most cases of liquid quenching
➢ With gas, no concern about boiling phenomena as with liquid
• HTC is more related to gas velocity than to surface temperature of the part
➢ Uniformity of gas flow pattern is more critical than that of liquid flow pattern on the part cooling
➢ Considerations of HPGQ process:
• Efficiency of heat exchanger
• Change in Tgas as it circulates through racked parts
• Uniformity of local gas velocity

Effect of Alloy Composition on Phase Transformation
➢ Variation of alloy composition
affects phase transformations
during quench hardening
• Made from different heat
• Same heat, but different bars
• Same bar, but different length
position
• Same length position, but
different radial position
➢ Same part geometry with
different variation of alloy
composition end up with
different distortion, hardness,
and mechanical properties
Moly: 1.20%
➢ Knowing the pedigree of the Moly: 0.20%
material condition from
previous processes is critical

Effect of Austenite Grain Size on Phase Transformation
➢ The grain size of the material is
affected by previous mechanical
and thermal processes
• Forging, rolling, normalizing, etc.
➢ Grain size has noticeable effect
on phase transformation or
hardenability
• Larger grains increase
hardenability
➢ Knowing the pedigree of the Grain size:
material condition from previous 0.1635mm
processes is critical
Grain size:
0.0635mm

Effect of Initial Phase on Phase Transformation
➢ With the same sample and heating rate,
different initial phases show significant variation
on transformation to austenite
• Initial phase: annealed phase Austenite transformation
• Phase after the first cycle: martensite
➢ During heating, material’s volume shrinks with
martensite tempering Repeated dilatometry tests
➢ With furnace heating and full austenitizing, using the same sample
parts with different initial phases will end up
with different distortion
➢ With fast heating rate (Induction heating, laser
heating, etc.), parts may have different austenite
amount and depth after heating
➢ Knowing the pedigree of the material condition Volume shrinkage caused by
from previous processes is critical martensite tempering

Effect of Initial Phase on Phase Transformation (Cont’d)
➢ Initial phase has significant effect on the
part size after hardening
➢ Three material initial conditions modeled
(AISI 4120)
• Ferrite/pearlite structure
• High temperature tempered martensite
• Low temperature tempered martensite
structure
➢ With the same heating and cooling
schedule, the material ends up with
different sizes (size distortion)
• Differences in austenite transformation strain
• Low temperature tempered martensite will
have additional shrinkage during heating
➢ Knowing the pedigree of the material
condition from previous processes is critical

Effect of Initial Carbides on Phase Transformation
➢ Initial carbide size has significant effect
on its decomposing rate in austenite
➢ Soaking temperature affects carbide
decomposing rate and maximum
amount carbide can decompose
➢ Knowing the pedigree of the material
condition from previous processes is
critical

Effect of Ferrite Forming on Martensite Transformation
➢ With forming ferrite during cooling, the amount of carbon in austenite increases, which affects the
martensite transformation (Ms and rate) during further cooling
• Carbon separation in phases is necessary to predict hardness, residual stresses, and distortion accurately
Ferrite
Transformation
Two tests have the same material,

same austenitizing, but different
cooling schedule; shows effect of
Ferrite formation on Martensite
transformation
20CrMnXX
Material 4120 from Martensite

Martensite Transformation
DANTE database
Transformation

Effect of Precipitate (Carbide) Growth, Coarsening, and
Their Effects on Material Property and Volume Change
➢ During high temperature tempering or annealing process of carbon or alloy steels, carbides will precipitate,
grow and coarsen
➢ Material volume may shrink during the process, and the amount of shrinkage is affected by the amount of
carbon and alloy in the steel
Carbide Coarsening

Modeling Example
Effects of Phase Transformations on Distortion
Effect of Phase Transformation on Distortion
Virtual Model Comparison with and without Phase Transformation
➢ Phase transformation has significant effect on the final distortion

• With phase transformation: 160 µm radial shrinkage; Without phase transformation: 900 µm radial shrinkage
This difference is
significant!
-160 µm
-900 µm
Assuming material is in F/P phase without phase transformation

Effect of Phase Transformation on Distortion (Cont’d)
Virtual Model Comparison with and without Phase Transformation
➢ Significance of phase transformation on distortion for steel

quench hardening process
Model with Phase

Transformations
Model without Phase

Transformations
Assuming material is in F/P phase
without phase transformation
Modeling Example
Induction Hardening
of a Crankshaft
Considering Inductor Rotation on Heating
➢ With higher rotation rate, the rotation effect is decreased
➢ In most cases, rotation can be ignored by heat treatment model

Induction Hardening of a Crankshaft Component
Brief Process Description:

➢ Two step heating, followed by polymer quenching
Temperature distribution at the end of Induction Heating

Induction Hardening of a Crankshaft Component (Cont’d)
➢ DANTE modeling can be used to optimize crankshaft geometry to be more suitable to heat treat process, obtain
beneficial residual stresses, avoid fracture, and improve fatigue performance
Modeling Example
Press Quenching of AISI 9310 Carburized Bevel Gear
Model and Process Description
Model Description:
➢ Bevel gear made of AISI 9310
➢ OD of 420 mm and ID of 140 mm
➢ Bevel teeth removed since bore distortion was main concern
• Internal spline was modeled
➢ Single tooth sector was modeled
• Assumes that cooling is uniform in the circumferential direction
270° section of bevel gear with bevel teeth removed
Process Description:
➢ Part was carburized on all surfaces to a case depth of 1.3 mm
➢ Austenitized at 850° C for 3 hrs.
➢ Transferred to press quench unit and quenched for 10 min.
➢ Cooled to room temperature
➢ Tempering was not modeled for this study
• Tempering usually has a negligible effect on distortion
• DANTE can model the tempering process
Single tooth model with bevel tooth removed
Schematic Showing Press Quench Tooling
➢ All dies and expanders are
modeled as rigid surfaces
➢ Thermal interaction between
dies/expanders and part is ignored
➢ All die sizes and locations relative
to the part are maintained in the
model

Carbon and Hardness Profiles
➢ All surfaces carburized
➢ Case depth is approximately 1.3 mm
➢ Hardness is directly after quenching, before tempering
Carbon Profile Carbon Profile as a function of Depth Hardness Profile

Predicted Shape Change at End of Quench
➢ Model showed that current
tooling design (grey) using
expander is not effective to
control the bore size relative to
immersion oil quench (blue)
➢ By changing expander to plug
with customized size, the
shrinkage of the bore was
brought within tolerance (green) Radial Disp.
➢ Further modifications of plug

with tapered profile can further
reduce the taper distortion
(brown)
➢ Contour plug has insignificant
improvement relative to the
tapered plug (purple)
Axial Disp.
Carburization Process Modeling
Carbide Formation during Low Pressure Carburization
Carbon and Carbide Evolution during LPC Process
of a High Alloy Steel
➢ Main challenges:
• Controlling the amount and size of primary carbides while
achieving the specified surface carbon and case depth
• Reduce furnace time
Schematic Plot of LPC Process

Prediction of Carbon and Primary Carbides from a
Carburization Process
Predicted Overall Carbon Distribution Predicted Primary Carbide Distribution

from a Carburization Process

Modeling Example
Quench Hardening of Multi-Steel Component
Modeling Multi-Steel Components
➢ Capability to model up to 5 different steel
grades for 1 component
➢ Useful when modeling heat treatment of
welded structures
Copyright © 2021 DANTE Solutions. All rights reserved. Hardness Martensite 49

Modeling Example
High Pressure Gas Quenching of a Ring Gear
Single Chamber and Multiple Chamber LPC-HPGQ Systems
➢ Different types of HPGQ apparatus require different thermal boundary conditions for models
• Quench gas ambient temperature, gas flow speed and pattern, etc.
Example of Multiple Chamber HPGQ Furnace Example of Single Chamber HPGQ Furnace

Model Description
➢ Model assumes non-unform gas flow around part
➢ Nonuniformity can be caused by:
• Racking configuration with respect to other parts
• Racking orientation of the part
• Gas flow through the chamber
➢ Nonuniform cooling can be more severe using gas
• Geometry has a significant effect with slower
cooling rates
Copyright © 2021 DANTE Solutions. All rights reserved. Gas Flow 52

Results After Quench
➢ Out-of-round distortion exists, even though the martensite and residual stress is uniform
➢ Out-of-round distortion due to non-uniform phase transformation to martensite
Radial Displacement, mm Martensite, Vol. Frac. Hoop Stress, MPa

Modeling Example
Decarburization of a Ring Gear
Carbon Profile Comparison
➢ Effective case depth of 0.4 mm for both cases
➢ Decarb layer approximately 0.15 mm deep
➢ Carburization and decarburization simulated using a single model
Carburized Case Decarburized Case

Axial Stress Comparison
➢ Decarburized case results in surface tensile stresses due to early martensite transformation
Carburized Case Decarburized Case

Modeling Example
Using Residual Stress from Heat Treatment
to Predict Part Service Performance
Root Hoop Stress Before and After Loading
➢ Load applied
normal to the
tooth flank
➢ Hoop stress in Load
the root shown Loading
➢ Same legend
scale used for With No
both loaded Residual Stress
conditions
➢ Applied stress
~500 MPa lower
in the tooth with
residual stress
Load
Loading
With Residual
Stress
Copyright © 2021 DANTE Solutions. All rights reserved. Before Loading After Loading 59
DANTE Utility: GCarb
➢ Gas carburization scheduler
➢ Can be used to design recipes
• Predict total time of last step, given the inputs
➢ Can be used to predict predefined recipes
➢ Predict carbon profile in terms of depth
➢ Predict as-quenched martensite hardness in
terms of depth
➢ Can include multiple carburization steps
➢ Material inputs can include:
• Steel grade
• Base carbon
• Alloy composition
➢ Process inputs can include:
• Time and temperature
• Carbon potential
• Effective case depth and carbon value at
effective case depth
DANTE Utility: VCarb
➢ Low pressure carburization scheduler
➢ Can be used to design recipes
• Determine entire boost/diffuse schedule
➢ Can be used to predict predefined recipes
➢ Predict carbon profile in terms of depth
➢ Predict as-quenched martensite hardness in
terms of depth
• Steel grade
• Base carbon
• Alloy composition
• Time and temperature
• Final surface carbon
• Effective case depth and carbon value at
effective case depth

DANTE Utility: Mat_Simulator
➢ DANTE Material Simulator
➢ Phase, hardness and strain predictions
for user defined heating and/or cooling
curves
• Material grade from the DANTE material
database
• Total carbon, carbon in carbide form, and
carbide size factor
• Initial tempering temperature
• Initial phase(s), grain size, and alloy
composition
• Initial temperature
• Heating/cooling curves
▪ Defined as Time-Temperature or Rate-
Target Temperature-Step Time
▪ Defined as a table of values

DANTE Utility: TTT_Generator
➢ TTT and CCT diagram generation
from the DANTE material database
• Material grade from the DANTE
material database
• Total carbon and carbon in carbide
form
• Grain size and alloy composition
• Upper and lower temperature
bounds
• The isothermal holding time (TTT)
• The shortest cooling time and the
longest cooling time (CCT)

DANTE Utility: Jominy_Predictor
➢ Jominy end quench
predictions from the DANTE
material database
• Material grade from the
DANTE material database
• Total carbon and carbon in
carbide form
• Grain size and alloy
composition

DANTE Utility: CHT_Generator
➢ Evaluate rate based and isothermal
austenite transformation behavior
• Material grade from the DANTE
material database
• Total carbon, carbon in carbide
form, and carbide size factor
• Initial tempering temperature
• Initial phase(s), grain size, and alloy
composition
• Upper and lower temperature
bounds
• The isothermal holding time (TTTH)
• The shortest cooling time and the
longest cooling time (CHT)

DANTE Utility: Dilot_Fit
➢ Fit phase transformation
behavior from dilatometry
tests
• Austenite to ferrite
• Austenite to pearlite
• Austenite to bainite
• Austenite to martensite
➢ Evaluate austenite
transformation behavior
➢ Parameters include:
• Starting value (initial guess)
• Upper and lower bounds
➢ Experimental data includes:
• Time-temperature-strain
experimental dilatometry data
• Model strain

DANTE Utility: Mec_Fit
➢ Fit mechanical data for internal
state variable model from
tension / compression tests
➢ Parameters include:
• Starting value (Initial guess)
• Upper and lower bounds
➢ Properties to define include:
• Temperature, Young’s Modulus,
and Poisson’s ration
➢ Conditions are the experimental
data and include:
• Stress, strain, strain rate,
temperature, and carbon content

Additional DANTE Utilities
➢ TTT_Fit and HTC_Fit are available
• Executed from a DOS command window
• Graphical User Interfaces are currently being developed
• Data can be plotted in Excel or any plotting software
TTT_Fit
➢ Used to fit phase transformation behavior from TTT diagrams
• Good to predict the timing of the transformations from austenite to ferrite, pearlite, and/or bainite
• No information on the martensite transformation behavior; start and end times are generally provided
• No information on transformation strains
HTC_Fit
➢ Must be used in combination with an Abaqus-DANTE model; not available for use with Ansys
➢ Used to determine the heat transfer coefficient in terms of temperature or time

Heat Treat Simulation: Benefits of DANTE

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Heat Treat Simulation: Benefits of DANTE

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sales, Training, Support & To get the most accurate

Development provided by: Heat Treatment Modeling

Causes of Distortion during High Pressure Gas Quenching Process of Steel

Abstract Finite Element Model Description

High pressure gas quenching (HPGQ) is touted as a means to

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2019/83997/228/521899/ht2019p0228.pdf

Figure 4: Temperature versus time used to describe the ambient

Results and Discussion

The distortion mode of interest for this study was out-of-round

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2019/83997/228/521899/ht2019p0228.pdf

Figure 7 shows the component at the instant before austenite

Before answering that question, let’s determine how the out-of-

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2019/83997/228/521899/ht2019p0228.pdf

Distortion from Quenching (Martensite Transformation)

Figure 12 shows the instance during quench just prior to the

Figure 10: Snapshot at the end of the austenite transformation,

Once the component reaches 1000° C, there is an additional

Figure 12: Snapshot of quenching, just prior to martensite

Figure 13 shows that ~85% martensite is now in the thin section

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2019/83997/228/521899/ht2019p0228.pdf

Figure 13: Snapshot during quenching as the martensite

Figure 14: Snapshot during quenching as the martensite

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2019/83997/228/521899/ht2019p0228.pdf

HTC100 HTC400 HTC1000

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2019/83997/228/521899/ht2019p0228.pdf

Figure 19: Comparison of martensite fraction for 3 HTC values

It is ultimately this pattern, shown in Fig. 19, that is responsible

Figure 21: Comparison of martensite fraction for 3 HTC values

Figure 20: Comparison of martensite fraction for 3 HTC values

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2019/83997/228/521899/ht2019p0228.pdf

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2019/83997/228/521899/ht2019p0228.pdf

[1] V. Heuer, K. Loser, and D.R. Faron, “Low Distortion Heat

Figure 24: Predicted bow distortion of finned coupon, shown in

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2019/83997/228/521899/ht2019p0228.pdf

Low pressure carburization (LPC) processes are becom-

L ing more widespread throughout industry due to the

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

QUICK DELIVERY HFL-4252-2IQ

• Graphite insulated hot zone

267.384.5040 | sales@solarmfg.com | solarmfg.com PROUDLY MADE IN THE USA

Low Pressure Carburizing Cycle Determination for High Alloy Steels

Abstract Comparing Gas Carburizing and Low Pressure

Figure 4: Portion of Fe-C equilibrium phase diagram.[6]

(a) Boost step for furnace A.

(b) Boost step for furnace B.

Experimental Results and Discussion

Predicting the development of the final carbon profile must

[1] Olga Karabelchtchikova, Fundamentals of Mass Transfer

Process to Minimize Distortion during High Pressure Gas Quenching Processes

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2021/84147/263/522065/ht2021p0263.pdf

Equipment Description and Operation

Equipment Design and Construction

Atmosphere Engineering (now part of United Process

Figure 1 shows the front of the quenching chamber, where the

Figure 2: Back of the DCGQ unit.

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2021/84147/263/522065/ht2021p0263.pdf

Figure 5 shows the unit performance using a recipe with 25° C

Figure 6: DCGQ Prototype unit temperature comparison

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2021/84147/263/522065/ht2021p0263.pdf

However, for gas quenching operations, it is assumed that the

Downloaded from http://dl.asminternational.org/heat-treating/proceedings-pdf/HT 2021/84147/263/522065/ht2021p0263.pdf

Figure 10: Comparison of experimental and simulation results

Material Testing Results Figure 11: Microstructure of a carburized coupon processed