×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

17-4PH Material

17-4PH Material

17-4PH Material

(OP)
Quick question - well, hopefully.

We have a part which specifies using 17-4PH, heat treated to 34 R/C Min. Since we buy this material in Cond "A", already above the min hardness requirements, are there any advantages to post (or pre)-machining heat treat? Seems like we machine the Condition A, as is, and verify the hardness requirements. Am I missing something? I've had experiences in machining the H900 - H1150M grades,but they all had higher hardness requirements.

RE: 17-4PH Material

17-4PH should not be specified by hardness but by the heat treatment such as H1025. At each heat treatment the hardness can vary up to 10RC. This is the reason why you will not see hardness values for PH steels in MIL-HDBK-5 but only strength values for the variety HXXXX heat treatments.

RE: 17-4PH Material

(OP)
So is it uncommon for a finished product, using this grade, not to be solution treated to one on the HXXXX grades?

Would it be acceptable to basically change the material spec to say "17-4PH, Condition A" .vs. "17-4PH Heat treated to R/C 34 Min"

RE: 17-4PH Material

What is the end use of the part?

I've have reservations about using 17/4 in Cond. A in dynamic situations.

RE: 17-4PH Material

Don't use it in the 'A' condition.
The properties are highly variable and the ductility may be low.
If you don't need it very strong use the H1150 or H1150M to maximize toughness.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
Rust never sleeps
Neither should your protection
http://www.trent-tube.com/contact/Tech_Assist.cfm

RE: 17-4PH Material

I do not think that anyone can guarantee that condition A will always give RC34 MIN. The fact that the current batch you have is RC34 is just luck. As unclesyd said using Condition A is not recommended. The PH17-4 should be heat treated as MIL-HDBK-5J specifically says "Heat Treatment — 17-7PH must be used in the heat-treated condition and should not be placed in service
in Condition A or T."

RE: 17-4PH Material

17-4PH in Condition A is susceptible to stress corrosion cracking.*  
It is also dimensionally unstable if heated.  Suppliers don't guarantee mechanical properties in Condition A, so evidentally experience has shown that it shouldn't be used in this condition, as pointed out in above responses.

Hardness will vary due to variations in composition, solution cooling rate, and aging heat treatment.  Carpenter Stainless Steels gives 'typical' values:
Condition A   HRC 36
H 900           HRC 44
H1025          HRC 38
H1075          HRC 36
H1150          HRC 33
H1150M        HRC 29

Note that Condition A has the same typical hardness as H1075.  I expect HRC's to vary within +10% (maybe what israelkk meant?)

* "For applications where stress corrosion cracking is a possibility, 17-4 material should be aged at the highest temperature compatible with the strength requirements and a temperature not less than 1000oF (wrought), 935oF (cast) and not less than four hours hold time."
-- MIL-H-6875H

RE: 17-4PH Material

I meant 10RC. MIL-HDBK-5C used to publish this data in a table) which was removed in newer versions.

RE: 17-4PH Material

(OP)
Thanks for all the feedback everyone.

Seems like we would be better off with an age-hardening of the Cond 'A" material - before machining. We don't want to worry about dimensional changes AFTER a heat treatment. The application is for a disposable surgical device, so I don't know if stress corrosion cracking would really be an issue, but it certainly sounds like the material could not be received consistently enough in the Cond A, to meet RC34.

I also found the Carpenter technical website very helpful.

RE: 17-4PH Material

If this is for a surgical device you'll be worrying about Chlorides, so yes SCC is a possibility.

RE: 17-4PH Material

For surgical devices, be sure to properly passivate.  Carpenter Technology recommends Types II or VIII per QQ-P35C [Nitric 1 & 4, respectively, in ASTM A967] or citric acid (note: more rigorously than at the minimum ranges in A967).
http://www.mmsonline.com/articles/100304.html

SCC shouldn't be a problem for disposable items (unless  someone sterilizes & recycles).

israelkk, thanks for info on the hardness variability.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources