×
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

Unexpected values of impact strenght !

Unexpected values of impact strenght !

Unexpected values of impact strenght !

(OP)
I have 2 steels with the same composition and the each block of these steels was heat treated in the same conditions QT (according to the heat treatment department !)

The mechanical properties show a low values of impact strenght for the second steel and high values for the first one.

We can see also a homogeneised microstructure for the first one and heterongenous one for the second.

I don't find why we have theses unexpected values of impact strenght in the second steel ?

Stan







 

RE: Unexpected values of impact strenght !

Can you tell some more about the heat treatment cycle for the 2 test bars. Obviously something seems to have gone wrong with the heat treatment of second test bar.

Just a nagging doubt,did someone forget to separate the test coupon from the riser before heat treatment.  

Chocolates,men,coffee: are somethings liked better rich!!
(noticed in a coffee shop)

RE: Unexpected values of impact strenght !

I concur with arunmrao in that it appears something is rotten in heat treating department or the sample had a miserable first life, thermally.
There is nothing in the chemistry.

The only time I've seen similar microstructure is where the steel was left at the austenizing temperature too long. I would also try to find the prior thermal history of this sample.  

RE: Unexpected values of impact strenght !

stanislasdz,

If you had not given the micros, I would have suspected test sample preparation and inspection to be a cause for low values.

Chocolates,men,coffee: are somethings liked better rich!!
(noticed in a coffee shop)

RE: Unexpected values of impact strenght !

(OP)
The test coupon were casting with the part !

Austenization  T°C : 880
Tempering : T°C : 610 °C


What is the microstructre showed in the steel N°2  ?

I guess it's tempered martensite with retained austenite (in white) is that true ?

How can i do more investigations ?

 

RE: Unexpected values of impact strenght !

The magnifications on the micrographs are not given but No2 looks to have a fairly hefty (prior) austenite grain size indicative of some 'overcooking'.  First stop should be the heat treatment charts from the furnaces.

Steve Jones
Materials & Corrosion Engineer
http://www.pdo.co.om/pdoweb/

RE: Unexpected values of impact strenght !

stanislasdz:
I tend to agree with Steve. Were T/C's attached to each coupon? Furnace temperatures can vary substantially within the working zone of the furnace, especially when the furnace hasn't been surveyed.

Because the coupons were cast, segregation could also be involved.

RE: Unexpected values of impact strenght !

As mentioned, it would help to know the magnification used in the micros.  The etchant would be helpful, too.

Offhand, I'd seriously wonder if the second sample had been quenched, if heat treated at all.  The yeild to tensile ratio of the first sample is 91%, what I would expect for a well-quenched sample.  On the second sample, its only 87.9%.  With a normalized sample, I'd expect a Y/T ratio of around 75-80%, so this is a little high, but not knowing the section size, it might be higher.  Based on the chemistry, this steel has rather high hardenability, so with a small section, I could believe those mechanical test results in the as-cast condition.

I don't know what these microstructures mean without the etchant and magnification.  It is very doubtful you are seeing retained austenite with this chemistry.  I'd guess that in Steel No. 2, you are looking at either a mixture of bainite and ferrite, or a coarse-grained banitic structure with the different-colored areas being different orientations of the large grains.

Can you get them to re-heat treat steel No 2?  If its properties come back to what you have with No. 1, it is obviously a heat treating problem and you really don't have to go any farther than that.

rp

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