Heat TreatToday publisher, Doug Glenn, sat down with heat treating specialist, Piotr Zawistowski, the managing director at SECO/VACUUM, to hear what he believes the future of heat treat holds. Karen Gantzer and Bethany Leone from Heat TreatToday also joined the conversation, recorded at the ASM Heat Treat Show 2021. In this episode, you’ll learn why Piotr believes LPC, automation, and predictive maintenance are the future of heat treat and how to get there.
Below, you can watch the video, listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or read an edited transcript.
The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.
Bethany Leone (BL): Peter first shared how SECO/WARWICK was on a mission to actualize the future of heat treat.
Piotr Zawistowski (PZ): I think we are on a mission, that is, SECO/WARWICK and I. I think the future of heat treatment will be LPC for carburizing, and gas quenching for quenching instead of oil. I think the future is LPC and hydrogen quenching, to be honest. Right now, most of carburizing is done in a carburizing atmosphere, and most of the quenching, as I know it. I think that everything is moving in the vacuum direction, if you will, but we're not there yet. So, that's our mission, in general.
I think I showed you a graph with what is the difference in quenching between oil and gas. Right now, with 25 bar quenching, we are on the level of slow oil. To get there, we have to use helium, but it's expensive, it's not economical. We can go to hydrogen, which is the speed of oil and it's everywhere, it's cheap. I think this is the future.
BL: This idea that the future of heat treat will be LPC and gas quenching – specifically with hydrogen – means moving in the vacuum direction, as Peter noted. But how fast will this transition come, especially given safety concerns with the use of hydrogen as a quenchant?
PZ: Exactly, that is the concern right now. I think it will come, but we are far away from it. Anyway, we don't have to go to hydrogen immediately, but I think we should go to nitrogen for now. We have some solutions for that, and on top of that, I think we will go from regular carburizing to LPC. It's not easy for people to switch, so our mission is for us to try to convince people to switch to LPC. We would like to make it as easy as possible for them so that's why—maybe 20 years ago—we thought about starting. Because we had quenching and carburizing, we thought, let's maybe leave quenching the same and start with carburizing. So, we developed vacuum oil quench furnaces just to make it easier so they only have to change one thing at a time. But then, we thought, it's a leap for them anyway because those are different oils and it's a vacuum oil. So, right now, we're introducing a furnace with vacuum carburizing with the regular atmosphere is a quenching chamber in regular oils that all the heat treaters have known for years.
DG: This is the SuperIQ?
PZ: This is the SuperIQ. I don't want to make it commercial, but this is another step. If you look at our wall here, we have six different products and five of them are for carburizing. It starts with Vector. It can have carburizing but it doesn't have to be, but anyway, they all are connected with carburizing. I think the mission is to convince people and to switch, in the industry, from all the messy dangerous, open-fire furnaces to new, clean, better technology.
BL: As we just heard, these are big transitions. So, if the first step towards heat treat with LPC is for heat treaters to use atmosphere carburizing with oil quench, what are the next steps to move to a fully vacuum-based future?
PZ: Step number two is vacuum oil quench and step number three is vacuum carburizing or LPC and high pressure gas quench. That is the future, in my opinion, and with hydrogen.
BL: As a review, moving to LPC could look like, first, using a traditional vacuum furnace with atmosphere capabilities, then, heat treating with vacuum oil quench, and finally, heat treating with LPC and high pressure gas quench. If such a transition is appealing, it would be good know what the productivity improvements of LPC are. . .
PZ: So, it depends; there are a couple factors. First, we have to take into account what kind of a case that we're talking about. But, in general, I can tell you that the productivity increase should be 50%, or even 100%, or more.
DG: You can double the amount of product through in the same amount of time?
PZ: Yes. And, it's just as simple with increasing the temperature, so we are not limited with low pressure carburizing with the temperature, whereas there is a limit that atmosphere carburizing can be done. So, we have a lot of possibilities here.
BL: So, a 50-100% increase in productivity and an increased temperature range comes along with low pressure carburizing, LPC. When considering LPC, there is the question of how traditional specification, which clearly state the necessity of atmosphere carburizing, can be compatible with this newer technology.
PZ: Yes, and those specs are changing.
DG: Is that going to be a hindrance?
PZ: Yes, it is right now, especially in aerospace. The automotive industry, they moved already to LPC, but aerospace we are trying to help to change those specs, and they are changing as we speak. A lot of those specs are still from the '80s, and there was no LPC back then. As you know, in aerospace, it is not easy to change a spec, but this is happening right now, as we speak.
DG: Are you guys involved with changes from Nadcap and all?
PZ: Yes, and we are involved in major aerospace players. We are doing tests for them and we are delivering them LPC furnaces. Some of them are still doing R&D, but this is a first step. With some of them, we are starting to see real production with LPC in aerospace, so we are getting there.
BL: To be sure, integrating the technical creation of specs by bringing heat treaters in touch with key end-users in the industry is necessary to have standards reflect effective heat treating techniques. Aside from standards, is there any resistance to adopting low pressure carburizing?
PZ: I think, people are afraid of what is new: atmospheric carburizing is very simple and it is well known, vacuum carburizing is something different. So, for atmosphere carburizing, it's only to control the potential in the furnace and time of carburizing. In vacuum carburizing, it's not that easy- you have to have a special simulator to create a recipe. People are afraid of it, but they shouldn't be because there is software. We have software that can make that recipe really easy and pretty quick. People are just afraid of something new.
We have it [simulator] to create a recipe for LPC for the purpose of carburizing and we actually provide it. This is our own simulator and we provide it with the equipment so it's very, very easy.
BL: In addition to an aversion to the new and the changes that may be involved, folks have a real concern with distortion. Peter then addressed this concern. . .
PZ: High pressure gas quenching, in general, is better, but there are other methods. It is not only us, but we are all trying to limit the distortions; we cannot say “eliminate” because that is impossible, but we can try to limit the distortion and control the distortions. What we introduced to the market is our 4D quench technology, “fourth” dimension is that we rotate the part during quenching.
BL: While there is resistance that may be from outdated industry specs, a suspicion of the new, or technical concerns which the industry is continually addressing, Peter was sure note that there are, in fact, drivers that are encouraging heat treaters to move towards LPC.
PZ: I think, the driver is both productivity and safety. As an example, the [US] Biden administration just committed to reduce CO2 emission by 50% by the end of the decade. This is good technology and there is a lot of fuel to emission out of atmosphere carburizing, internal and external. But, there will be a push for climate change and CO2 emission. I think, it's not only mandates, but, I think, in Europe, for example, they have a lot of grant; there is a lot of government money you can get if you are reducing the CO2 emission. I think, for the heat treaters, it should be easy to capitalize on it. As I said, no CO2 emission on LPC. There is no emission at all. That is the beauty of the technology.
BL: Certainly, financial incentives to adopt “greener” technologies as well as personal desire to do so would be motivating. Is there anything about the heat treated parts cosmetically that would make LPC attractive?
PZ: Of course. And, you don't have to wash it after, which is great. It depends, as we still can have LPC and oil quench, you have to wash it, but if you can get to the gas quench, you've eliminated the wash part. They just look nice and shiny and bright. The color is better and you can eliminate washing.
BL: It is clear that LPC, one of the factors that plays into the future of heat treat as Peter envisions, has challenges and benefits for heat treaters to consider. Peter then talked about two additional factors for the future of heat treat: automation and predictive maintenance.
PZ: There are two other factors. One is automation, which is something big and it's more and more especially nowadays with the labor issue. But, it is to eliminate the human error part of it. On top of that, it is the traceability of the parts. More and more customers would like no operators and the machine has to run by itself. We have that—a full system of equipment. You just place the basket with parts, or several baskets, and then the robot takes it to the furnace, carburizes, quenches, tempers, washes and then it comes out, completely untouched. Robots are the automated loader. That is the direction.
Another is predictive maintenance, which is a big deal right now. By predictive maintenance, I mean that the system has to predict the failures or the downtimes. A lot of systems, which are available on the market are called “predictive maintenance”, but they are reactive. For example, they have sensors on the machine and if something breaks, it sends you an email message, or whatever. Our SECO/PREDICTIVE, which is our predictive maintenance, is based on an algorithm. The algorithm is written in such a way that the system learns on failures and the more equipment we have connected to it, the more data we have, like everything we have around us right now, all the Googles and Amazons and so on. I think this is the future, as well. So, everything has to be connected to one database to predict what will happen before it happens.
DG: Can you give me an example? Let's say you've got a high temperature fan inside a vacuum furnace. How would the SECO/PREDICTIVE or predictive maintenance work on that?
PZ: I think we would control the vibration on it. I think that's one way to do it. And, at a certain level, it would send a signal – "Watch out! - you are about to have a problem". It is better to do it that way because, then, there is time to order a replacement or schedule something so it will not break. But, the goal is to predict the failure before it happens.
BL: With thoughts of LPC, automation, and predictive maintenance on our minds, we then walked over to a display of various furnaces to see how SECO/VACUUM applied these insights to their own furnaces. Peter began with the Vector, a versatile high pressure gas quench furnace.
PZ: This is a single chamber, multipurpose furnace. It is for LPC carburizing and high pressure gas quenching. This is the main furnace and, I think, 70% of what we sell. Maybe this is, like 50%.
Then 20% are the vacuum oil quench furnaces. The vacuum oil quench furnaces heat processing chambers are the same as the Vector but then we can quench it in oil or we can have three chambers that can be continuous production or you can have oil quench on one side and high pressure gas quench on the other side. We call it CaseMaster Evolution. This is our middle step. As I said, our goal is to go for LPC.
But, then, there is another one, the new baby in the family. [Peter then gestures to, what they call, the Super IQ vacuum furnace.]
For people, it was not easy to make a switch, so this is like a hybrid. The processing chamber is vacuum carburizing but the quenching chamber is like a traditional atmosphere quench. It is like a pure replacement: you can take one out and put this guy in. You have all the benefits from low pressure carburizing but you operate mainly like an old and traditional furnace. This is to make it easier in the transition.
BL: After learning how certain furnace designs can be helpful to heat treaters who have different processing needs or who are trying to convert to LPC, we then moved to see how LPC is being brought to pit-furnace size loads.
PZ: This is another one, another tool in our mission, I would say. This is a pit carburizing furnace but with LPC. Right now, for big, heavy parts, they are carburizing atmosphere in pit furnaces and then they open the furnace and they just transfer it with a crane to an oil tank. This is basically the same, but the pit furnace is with LPC. There is nothing like this on the market right now.
We are trying to bring the LPC advantages to big parts and pit-style carburizers, as well.
BL: From LPC for large loads, we ended our tour with an LPC furnace with an interesting way to maintain traceability.
PZ: This is a single-piece carburizing furnace which we talked about.
So “CaseMaster”, which was the name of our traditional integral quench carburizing furnace in the past, we no longer do. Right now, if we have an RFQ for atmosphere carburizer, we go with LPC.
Thank yous from the group.
Doug Glenn
Publisher Heat TreatToday
To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio and look in the list of Heat Treat Radio episodes listed.
Heat TreatToday publisher Doug Glenn wraps up this three-part series with Pelican Wire experts by talking with John Niggle from Pelican Wire about thermocouple insulation types and considerations.
The first two episodes cover the history, types, vocabulary, standards, and other basics of understanding how thermocouples work. Listen to the previous episodes of the series here.
Below, you can either listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or you can read an edited transcript.
The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.
Doug Glenn (DG): Welcome to Heat TreatRadio!
John Niggle (JN): Yes, it's good to see you again, Doug. I know we've run into each other a couple of times out there in the field. I'm looking forward to having the opportunity to do all of this stuff in person again.
DG: It will be nice. Before we hit the record button, we were talking about shows this fall and hoping that they happen because you, like I, are ready to get out and go.
You are the business development manager for Pelican Wire. If you don't mind, give us just a little bit of background about you and about your experience in the whole thermocouple world.
JN: Sure, absolutely. As you said, I am the business development manager at Pelican Wire. I've been at Pelican since 2013 so we're working out my eighth year here. I'm a career industrial sales representative. I do have previous experience also, actually, in the process instrumentation industry. Way back when, before I even knew how to spell thermocouples, I was selling that stuff when I first got out of college. My career has, sort of, gone full circle, let's say.
DG: Very nice. Well, you've got plenty of years of experience, which is great. We've had two previous episodes with your colleague, Ed Valykeo, and we covered a good bit of stuff. We covered a lot of basics in the first episode. We covered standardization, and things of that sort, in the second episode. I want to encourage any listeners who haven't listened to those episodes, feel free to go back, Google “Heat TreatRadio” and search for “Pelican Wire” and listen to episodes 1 and 2.
John, you and I want to move forward. I'm always kind of curious about this question: From your perspective, with your experience, why do we use thermocouples? Let's talk about what they are and why we use them.
JN: First of all, we have to assume that somebody is trying to measure the temperature of some sort of a process- a process or an event of some kind. That's basically what they're trying to do. Compared to other devices like RTDs, bimetal thermometers, liquid expansion state change devices and so forth, thermocouples are robust, they're inexpensive; they're repeatability, they're ease of use and size -- all of those factors lead them to be more widely used than another sort of thermal measurement device of any kind. It is the preferred method.
On top of that, I mentioned the expense part. Because they're relatively inexpensive, there are certain industries, the heat treat industry and smelting industry, for example, consider these as, actually, consumable or disposable. So, the cost factors in significantly in the industry that we're talking about here.
DG: I live in western Pennsylvania and the town where my wife grew up, there was an old Leeds and Northrup manufacturing plant. I believe they made the consumable thermocouples for melt shops. You would, basically, throw the thermocouple in and it would melt quickly but it would give you a response during that time.
JN: Right. And, as I mentioned earlier, the response factor is important, or that's one of the factors considered, when people are looking at thermocouple wire. And, you're correct, Ed Valykeo, as you mentioned, has 40 years of experience in the industry and has seen exactly the same sort of thing that you're talking about where people will just tack weld it onto something that gets thrown into a furnace or it gets thrown into a melting pot or something like that, and they're looking for that instantaneous temperature.
If you don't mind, I'll tell you that we've done some work, actually, in the aerospace industry and we had a customer that we sold significant, literally miles, of thermocouple wire to (when I say aerospace, it was specifically for space exploration) and this was because of whatever we had done with the insulation. I can't tell you, because it was before my time, but this is what was relayed to me- they were able to get another 3 - 4 seconds of temperature measurement out of that wire. That critical, extra data for them made all the difference in the world.
DG: We're going to get to the insulation part which should be interesting. You won't have to tell us any trade secrets, but we are headed in that direction anyhow.
So, different types of thermocouples. Again, just a review question for us. Why use them? Why the different types and why are we using different types?
JN: Forgive me, Doug, and the rest of the audience, for that matter, if I end of repeating some of the things that came out in the previous episode. Basically, when you're talking about thermocouples, there are the two chemistries; for lack of a better term, you have “base” and “noble” metals. The base metals are really the metals that we focus on at Pelican. The noble metals are the more expensive ones- rare earth metals, tungsten, titanium, platinum and all those sorts of things that people spend exorbitant amounts of money on. There are purposes for those, but, typically, what you're going to see in the heat treat industry, in particular, you're going to see a lot of the base metals.
I like to say that, truly, the 20 gauge K, in particular, is the 800 pound gorilla in the room. It's almost considered, and I think it would be by people in the industry, a commodity. There are untold miles of that wire that are used in the heat treating and smelting industry. K is used, really, because of the temperature range. It fits in well with what people do in the heat treating industry. It is good for temperatures from zero up to around 1260 C. It's inexpensive, it covers the ranges that those people are looking for, and, again, it's the 800 pound gorilla in the room when it comes to temperature measurement in the heat treating industry.
The other types such as J comes up periodically, particularly if you're looking at lower temperature ranges. You won't see it quite as often in the heat treating industry. You will see it somewhat, but not to the degree that you would K. The J thermocouple wire has an iron leg so it does oxidize and you need to be careful about that sort of thing. Type T thermocouple wire has a narrower range. It has very good response times in cryogenic and cold temperature applications. The higher, upper end of type T thermocouple wire, typically, wouldn't be of terrible interest to the audience that we're involved with here, for the most part, because the upper ends around 370 to 400 C degrees, in lab environments; that's where it's going to be the most popular.
There is also type E. It's a higher temperature, as well. Response time. Broader range is a little bit better than K at lower temperature ranges. An interesting one is type N that you will see fairly often in the heat treating industry. For those people not familiar with type N, it is different alloys than type K. It covers virtually the same temperature range that type K does and will, actually, have less drift than type K. It is more expensive because of the alloys that it is made of, but, again, if you're interested in less drift, then type N is worth looking at. It hasn't quite caught on in the US the way it has in, say, Europe, in particular, and that really has to do with the infrastructure of the instrumentation. People have instrumentation that is either calibrated for K or J or something like that. Now, there is instrumentation out there, now, that would use K and N both, so we may see more, particularly, in the aerospace industry I would think it would become more and more popular.
DG: That's helpful. It's always good to hear those things over again.
How about the parameters and/or the factors that need to be considered when you're constructing the wire to start with? What do we need to be worried about in that area?
JN: I don't know if I like the word “worried” exactly, Doug. It's more, what do we need to think about? What do we need to be concerned about? Besides the metallurgy that we just talked about, we need to think in terms of what the sensor is actually going to look like. Is it just the wire? Thermocouple wire, by itself, can be a thermocouple; that's it, without any protection or anything like that.
As I mentioned earlier, you can tack weld it to an ingot, or something like that, and there you go. You don't have any probe, there is no thermal well to protect it or anything like that. But, what we do need to think about, then, is the process that it's going to be involved in. Where is it going to be used? Is it going to see an environment where there is a flow. Is it going to see an environment where somehow the thermocouple wire can become damaged? In that case, then, we're headed in the direction of talking about what our customers are interested in. And for a customer for Pelican Wire, we're mainly talking about people who actually assemble thermocouples – they make the connections, they have the molds and all that sort of thing.
To be clear, Pelican Wire just makes wire. And, again, the thermocouple wire can be used as a thermocouple, but a tremendous amount of wire is actually connected to some sort of a sensor or a probe, as I said, and is protected in a thermal well or something along those lines.
DG: Do we also have to be concerned with oxidizing, carburizing atmospheres, corrosive atmospheres? Is that, also, something that we need to be aware of?
JN: Absolutely. And that is one of the reasons you will see a probe thermocouple is because the wire is protected from that atmosphere. Nearly all of the wires that we talked about would be affected, particularly, in say, like a sulfurous environment; it would be subject to corrosion, oxidation and something along those lines.
Other factors, of course, are the accuracy and how much space we have. Believe it or not, if it's going to go into a small orifice, then we need to think about what the age size is going to look like. And then the environment: Is it going to be abrasive? Is there movement? Is there some sort of braiding motion that could wear a hole in the wire in the insulation and so forth? There are a lot of things to think about.
DG: And, it would probably be a good idea, especially if our heat treat people are running anything outside of the norm, regardless of what it is, whether it be atmosphere, configuration, fixturing, if there is anything outside the norm, they would probably be wise to mention it to the thermocouple wire and/or thermocouple probe manufacturer and make sure that they know so that you guys can get help get the right thing on there in their furnace.
JN: Yes, absolutely. At the end of the day, we work with this every day. We have design engineers on staff who can assist with technical questions and so forth and, of course, our customers, and the actual thermal wire assembly people, this is what they do every day of the week.
DG: Let's talk about something a little bit new, I guess, to our conversation here in this 3-part series, and that is the insulation that's going to go around these wires. Can you tell us what are the different types of insulations and what are the advantages and/or disadvantages of each, and why would we be using them?
JN: I'll break it down into, what I would call, the four basic categories. That would be an extruded insulation, insulations that are tapes, fiberglass insulations that are routinely worked with and then, of course, high temp textiles. High temp textiles, in particular, would be of interest to the audience here in the heat treat metallurgy world.
Extruded insulations can be a variety of thermoplastics. A term that, I think, Ed has probably mentioned before and we've talked about before is extension grade wire. That typically has a PVC insulation on it and the reason PVC works for that is that it's cheap and extension grade wire, typically, does not see the sorts of high temp environments that you're going to see in processes. It's really a signal wire that takes the signal from the probe or from the sensor to the process control device.
DG: So what kind of temperature tolerances can the extruded wire handle? Are we talking 300, 400 degrees? I guess you talk C, I talk F.
JN: We talk whatever language our customer likes to talk, but we do talk C quite a bit. So, PVC is quite low, it's in the 200s F. But, when you're looking at fluoropolymer insulations (and Pelican is really a high temp house, so we focus on the higher temp insulations) you have FEP and PFA, those are in the 200s. PFA actually goes up to 260. So, you can see, it's probably not suitable for heat treating applications, smelting and that sort of thing. The advantages to those compounds would be that you're going to have abrasion resistance. Think about your Teflon frying pan: it's slick, it's smooth. So, if you're in an environment where there is some movement, it will be good for that. And, of course, it will have excellent moisture resistance and chemical resistance. Those would be the advantages to the extruded wire. The other advantage would be, because you'll have a thinner wall than you will with the other insulations, you'll have some more flexibility. So, if you have a type N radius, you can go around a corner easily.
The next step up, in terms of temperature resistance, would be the tapes. Basically, in that area, you're looking at PTFE tape, mica take and capped-on tape or polyamide tape. Those will give you slightly higher heat resistances. The mica, in particular, would give you more. (Mica, as a matter of fact, is used as a supplement to the PTFE to give it even higher heat resistance.) Mica will go up to 500 C, PTFE and the polyamides match, in terms of heat resistance, the extruder products around 260. What they do give you, again if you use the tapes, is the heat resistance you're looking for, some abrasion resistance and the moisture resistance. You'll have less flexibility because those products are stiffer, but they're also going to be a little bit lighter weight unless you incorporate the mica into it. Then, when you do that, you're going to end up with an even stiffer wire and it will be a little bit heavier, and all those will be larger in diameter than an extruded wire. If you look at an environment where you need to poke the wire through a hole and that hole is an eighth of an inch, you need to think really hard if what you're doing is going to work.
DG: So you've got extruded and you've got tapes.
JN: The next step after that would be fiberglass. In the case of fiberglass, you have E glass and S glass. Of the two, E glass would have the lower temperature resistance and you're looking at 482 C on the high end. For S glass, you're up to 704 C. Now you're starting to talk about insulations that you will see in the heat treat environment; it's quite common, especially on the S glass side where you're looking at the 704, you'll see a lot of people that need 500 C for whatever reason. The advantage, obviously, to the glass, as I mentioned, is the higher heat resistance.
There are disadvantages. Think about fiberglass for a minute. We actually have to saturate the wire to keep it from fraying without it ever really experiencing any abuse. If we don't saturate it, then the wire can fray, and you can get fiberglass in your fingers even, which is unpleasant. So, fiberglass has some disadvantages like that. If you put it in an environment where there is some movement, abrasion, vibration or something like that, it can be problematic. Also, it's going to be stiffer because it's saturated, typically. Sometimes you'll even see those saturants even cause problems in a heat treat environment where, if it gets too hot, the saturant can leave an ash behind. You're going to lose flexibility, as I said. You're not going to have the abrasion resistance, the chemical resistance or the moisture resistance that you're going to get from an extruded product.
The other one that we see, again, literally miles and miles and miles of, in the heat treat world would be what's called Refrosil and Nextel, (those are both, actually, trade names). We're talking about vitreous silica and ceramic. Again, those are, what we call, high temp textiles. Now, you're looking at products that are in the 1200 C range. Ceramic goes up to 1204, vitreous silica is in the 870's. Again, there are some of the same disadvantages with those that you're going to have with glass. It's going to be somewhat fragile. We don't saturate those because the saturants are not going to hold up in the environments that they're going to be placed into, so you would have that ash residue left.
Again, it will be stiff, it will be even larger in diameter than the fiberglass, which is larger than tape which is larger than the extruder products. Of course, you're not going to have the abrasion resistance, the moisture resistance or the chemical resistance. But it does protect the wire in those elevated temperature environments that are critical for the heat treating industry.
DG: Let's back up a bit. I want to understand something you said. You said, in the fiberglass, it is saturated and in the textiles it's not. I want to know what you mean by saturated.
JN: It's either a solvent-based or a water-based saturant that is applied to the wire to protect it. Think in terms of a varnish. It would be like a protective coating. Again, it just keeps the exterior of the wire, the bare wire, from being exposed. It's a coating, but we call it a saturant.
DG: High temperature textiles tend to be the stuff we're using, in the heat treat industry, probably most.
JN: Yes. Again, when I mentioned the 800 pound gorilla in the room, the 20-gauge K with the vitreous silica or the Refrosil would be an extremely popular product in the heat treating industry, absolutely.
DG: Let me ask you a very, very fundamental question. I'm curious of your answer to this. Why do we insulate wires at all? Is it done to protect from temperature or is it done simply to protect them from crossing with each other and grounding or shorting out? Why do we insulate?
"I'll go back to something that I know Ed talked about: the Seebeck effect. You have this loop; if you don't have that loop, then you don't have anything. You don't have the EMF, the electromotive force, that you're looking for."
John Niggle
JN: It is the second part. When you look at any wire construction, the two singles have to be insulated from each other. I'll go back to something that I know Ed talked about: the Seebeck effect. You have this loop; if you don't have that loop, then you don't have anything. You don't have the EMF, the electromotive force, that you're looking for. We do make a wire that is not duplex, but, typically, what you're going to see is a wire that has two singles and then it's duplexed with an insulation over the top. We do make a wire that the two singles are jacketed in parallel and then no jacket is placed over the top but that is for an application that wouldn't be suitable for the heat treat industry.
DG: I asked that question, because for those who are unbaptized in this conversation, it's kind of interesting. So, we're talking about insulation and we're doing a lot of conversation about temperature ranges and, for someone who wouldn't think so, they would say, "Well, that means you're insulating because of temperature." But, really, the reason you're insulating wire is for electrical. It's to keep them apart. It's just how high of temperatures those insulations can handle, not that you're insulating the wire to keep them cool. Right?
JN: Absolutely not.
DG: That may sound very basic, but there may be people that think that, so I want to get that on the table.
JN: Most of the people in the audience are probably familiar with this already. Typically, what happens is the wire is stripped so we have exposed ends. And then those ends, as we mentioned earlier, can be tack welded onto something or they can just be out there. The thermocouple world, by the way, is an incestuous world where we have customers, we kind of compete with those customers, some of our customers compete with others of our customers but then they buy supplies from each other. You probably already know that from talking with other people in this industry. At any rate, the wire is stripped and then it's either tack welded or it's connected to some sort of sensor or probe of some kind.
DG: It's a tangled web, the whole thermocouple world. You've got customers, yet you sell to certain suppliers who also sell to those customers. It can be complicated! But that's OK, we'll let you guys worry about that; we just want to make sure the thermocouples are good and we'll be in good shape.
Another question for you: We talked about the process and a lot of different environments about what type of thermocouple you should use, but does the process being monitored influence the type of insulation that should be used? Obviously, temperature is going to have an impact, but is there anything else?
JN: Yes. Let's circle back to what we talked about earlier just a little bit. When you look at the process, you need to think of what is going to happen to that wire? Is it going to see, first of all as you mentioned, the temperatures? That is certainly important so that comes into play with the insulation. But, we need to think about, Is there movement? Is there going to be some abrasion? Is there some sort of activity that could damage the wire somehow? Then, we need to look at the chemicals, like we talked about. Do we need some chemical resistance? Do we need water resistance? Is it going to be submersed in something? Those things all need to be considered.
Again, as I mentioned earlier, the actual placement of the wire. Does it need to be inserted in a hole? At Pelican, we produce wire down to 40 and actually 44 gauge which, I think, will probably be stunning to most of the people in your audience because, again, 20-gauge K is what these people think about. In the heat treating industry, what you see is they need a robust wire, something that's going to be able to handle those temperatures and a large conductor like that.
Another thing to think about, actually, is a bend radius. Are you going to put the wire somewhere where it needs to go around a corner, around a bend? Then, are you better off using a stranded wire? A stranded wire is going to have more flexibility. You can buy a 20-gauge stranded wire, you can buy 24-gauge, 28-gauge, 36-gauge.
DG: Now, what do you mean by stranded?
JN: Stranded wire would be instead of just one solid 20-gauge conductor, you have multiple strands that make up that 20-gauge. But, if you think about it, multiple strands of wire will actually be more flexible. You'll still get the same results, but it will be more flexible if you need to go around a corner or if you need to insert it into something.
DG: It's almost like a braided wire as opposed to a solid.
JN: Yes. Now braiding is a little bit of a different process. When we're talking about stranded wire, it's, basically, just spiral. Braided is more crossed into each other, which, coincidentally, is the way that the fiberglass and the high temp textile insulations are made – those are actually braided. And, by the way, I'll just toss this out, it's made on equipment that really hasn't changed since the ‘20s. I'm not talking about the 2020s, I'm talking about the 1920s! Rumor has it, some of that braiding equipment was, actually, designed by Thomas Edison. I'm not sure if that's really true. But that is the process used to apply the fiberglass and high temp textiles.
DG: So, anything else as far as any other considerations we need to take into consideration when we're talking about choosing insulation? If not, that's fine.
JN: I think I covered them, Doug.
DG: At Pelican Wire, your company, I know you guys deal with a broad number of markets, I'm sure, one of them being heat treat. What do you see as any special demands or special concerns that are, maybe, unique or, at least, inherent in the heat treat market?
". . . what you see is insulations that are higher in temperature resistance, as well. In some cases, as I mentioned earlier, in ovens where there is a saturant involved, we could see ash. Some people ask that saturant not be applied to the fiberglass and that's certainly something that can be done."
John Niggle
JN: For the heat treat market, again, I'll go back to what I said earlier, we see a lot of 20-gauge K used. It's because of the higher heat requirements, the higher heat that is involved with the processes of heat treating. Secondly, what you see is insulations that are higher in temperature resistance, as well. In some cases, as I mentioned earlier, in ovens where there is a saturant involved, we could see ash. Some people ask that saturant not be applied to the fiberglass and that's certainly something that can be done.
Sometimes we're even asked to not put tracers. We go back to what we talked about earlier with the metallurgy- you have two legs, a positive and a negative leg. Well, how do those end users tell those legs apart if they look similar, if they're an alloy of some kind? So, we put a tracer wire in there so you have a red leg and a yellow leg, in the case of type K, or sometimes you just have a red leg depending on what they ask for. Those tracers can, actually, cause problems, too, if the ovens are hot enough and they are in there for long enough times. We even have customers who ask us not to put tracers in their wire, for that matter.
Accuracy, of course, is extremely important. I know that Ed, in a previous episode, talked about standard limits, special limits and all that sort of thing. Typically, you're going to see special limits used in the heat treat industry and, in some cases, we're asked even for special calibration points. In previous podcasts, I've heard you talk with other people about AMS2750 and how that comes into play. It is extremely critical for the folks in the heat treating industry and something that clearly a thermocouple wire producer has to understand.
DG: Let's say you've got a customer that calls you and wants to talk about their thermocouple needs, let's say there is some sort of special need. What would you suggest they have, in hand, when they call you? What do you need to know from them to help you do a better job with their thermocouple needs?
JN: Honestly, the first question we do ask is: What temperature are you going to be running this at? How hot are we going to be? We, absolutely, need to know that. That helps us narrow down the alloy that we might be looking at, whether it's type K, type J, type E, or whatever. And then, of course, it's a natural thing to dial in the insulation after that. Quite honestly, one of the things that frustrates me is when people say, "I need Teflon." Well, OK. Do you need FEP or do you need PFA? Those are both fluoropolymers like Teflon is. We need to talk about temperature resistance, so don't tell me you just need Teflon. We do need some specifics when it comes to that sort of thing. Again, we talked earlier about stranding and stranded wire. Do you need some flexibility? What gauge size do you think you need? How robust does this wire need to be? Those are some of the key factors we need to know about.
DG: Let's say, for example, somebody does want to get a hold of you or Ed, your colleague who was on the first two episodes, how is best to do that? How can we get a hold of Pelican Wire?
JN: Our web address is www.pelicanwire.com, about a simple as it possibly gets. Our email addresses are, actually, quite simple, as well. If anybody wants to email me, it's jniggle@pelicanwire.com. You can contact me directly, if you want to, or we have a sales inbox and that is simply sales@pelicanwire.com. We do have a phone number, but it seems a lot of people don't care about phone numbers as much these days. But the number is 239-597-8555.
DG: I have one, unrelated, question for you that I know the world is wanting to know: How is it having a company in Naples, Florida, that's what I want to know?
JN: I'll tell you what, Doug, the answer today will be different than the answer in October or December. It's actually quite nice. We moved down here 8 years ago in 2013. I moved from the Midwest and didn't really feature myself owning palm trees, but I own palm trees, which is pretty darn cool. We are, as the crow flies, about 3 miles from the water, where I live anyhow, 20 minutes by car. Our office and manufacturing facility are, actually, on the very edge of the everglades. You can see the picture in the background behind me. That's our building. That's actually facing east. That is a sunrise over the everglades. We're on the very edge of the everglades. There is a lake right next to our building and then, after that, it's everglades all the way over to Miami. And, real quick, our weather pattern comes from the east. It doesn't come from the Gulf. This time of year, in the summer at about 3:00 in the afternoon, about the time that we're doing this call right now, a thunderstorm blows up and it comes from the east over the everglades and it moves to the west. The trees blow that direction, you can see it coming. It's interesting. During the wintertime, I have to tell everyone, you'd probably be jealous, but it is truly paradise.
DG: Yes! I've been to Naples, ate at a nice restaurant down there, years ago, but it was very nice.
You guys are also employee-owned, right?
JN: That's correct, yes. The company is over 50 years old. The founder of the company passed away in 2008 and, before he passed away, he converted the company to an employee-owned operation. So, we've been employee-owned since 2008. We've purchased a couple other companies since then that folded into, what we call, the Wire Experts Group. Pelican Wire is part of that. We have a sister company out in Colorado. We bought another facility in Chicago and folded that into our company in Colorado. So, yes, we're employee-owned and it works out really well for the employee owners, I'll tell you that much.
DG: That's great. John, it's been a pleasure talking with you. Thanks for taking the time. I appreciate your expertise. Hopefully, we will see you out on the pavement somewhere in the real world.
JN: I'll, actually, be seeing you at the heat treat show in about 3 weeks.
DG: That's about right, yes.
JN: Hopefully, some of the people that are listening we will see, as well.
Doug Glenn
Publisher Heat TreatToday
To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio and look in the list of Heat Treat Radio episodes listed.
Doug Glenn, publisher of Heat TreatToday, moderates a panel of 6 industry experts who address questions about the growing popularity of hydrogen combustion and what heat treaters need to do to prepare. Experts include Joe Wuenning, WS Thermal; Jeff Rafter, Selas Heat Technologies; Brian Kelly, Honeywell Thermal Solutions; John Clarke, Helios Electric Corporation; and Perry Stephens, EPRI.
Get IMMEDIATE access to this 60-minute, highly-informative discussion.
Heat TreatToday publisher Doug Glenn has a second conversation with long-time thermocouple industry expert Ed Valykeo from Pelican Wire about T/C accuracy and classifications. Listen to learn more.
This is the second episode in a series of three on Thermocouples 101. Check out the first episode of the series here.
Below, you can either listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or you can read an edited transcript.
The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.
Doug Glenn (DG): Ed, welcome back. I'm glad you were brave enough to come back. Last time, Ed, we talked about a lot of good basic thermocouple stuff. We talked about, basically, Thermocouples101 which I mentioned last time, was one of the best and most well read articles on our website, which is great. We covered a lot of different things last time. I was just reviewing it, and it's interesting, we were talking about several different men as you gave a good history of thermocouples starting back in the early 1800's and talking about guys like Alessandro Volta, where we get the word volt, and Thomas [Johann] Seebeck and the Seebeck effect or the Seebeck coefficient, and things of that sort. We talked about all the different noble thermocouples, J, K, E, N, and T, and we talked about the N leg and the P leg on all of those which was all good. It was very interesting. If you didn't listen to the first episode, you ought to go back and listen to it. It's really a pretty good summary of thermocouples, a basic primer on thermocouples. We also did some things like vocabulary for ourselves; we learned what an EMF was, electromotive force and things of that sort. It was very good.
This time, I think we want to move on to, what we could commonly classify or in a big picture classify as, standardization and accuracy discussion. But, before we do, I've got a quick follow-up question from the last episode. We had mentioned that an EMF is produced when two dissimilar metals are joined together or placed together. There is a very, very, small electric current that's created. My question is: Can you do that with any metal? Is it possible? Or do you have to have only certain types?
Ed Valykeo (EV): Theoretically, yes, you could probably join any two different metals and produce some sort of voltage. However, the accuracy of that, and if doesn't mean anything, probably not. The thermocouple base metal thermocouples that we talked about last time, are industry known, used worldwide and, quite honestly, have been perfected over many, many years. So, yes, you could generate a volt probably from any two metals, but, really, to produce an accurate thermocouple, something you can measure temperature with, you're going to want to stick to the thermocouple types that we talked about.
And again, today, we're talking about the base metal thermocouples which are known as Type K, Type J, Type T, Type E and Type N. Those are the base metal thermocouples.
DG: Let's talk a little bit about standardization of these things, and accuracy. My understanding, Ed, is that there are one or more organizations out there in the world that deal with certifying, qualifying, or giving us standards for these thermocouples. Can you tell us a little bit about those organizations? Then, we'll jump in and talk more specifically about the classifications and accuracy.
EV: Sure. One of the bodies that we use is ASTM. In ASTM-E230, are all the thermocouple tables for the different types of thermocouples, not just the base metal, but also noble metal. It's a fairly lengthy book. All the thermocouples are based on the ITS-90 scale and that is the EMF output of each one of these thermocouples at prescribed temperatures. We could go into more detail with that if you'd like, but there are a number of ways that they have extremely accurate temperature medium to measure the thermocouple output. But, that's what the tables in ASTM-E230 are based on, the ITS-90 scale.
When we talk about ASTM, there are also a couple of other standards that we use, and we'll probably get into a little bit later in the conversation when we talk about calibrating the thermocouples themselves. So ASTM-E220 and ASTM-E207 are the two that are used in calibration of the thermocouples.
DG: But, basically, the organization that does that, I don't know if we want to call them a lab or not, but the organization that does is it ASTM.
EV: ASTM is one of the bodies that publishes the books that I call the standards for thermocouples. I think I won't be mistaken, but ITS-90 is really more an IST list. They control the ITS-90.
DG: Let's move into the accuracy standards, then. I think you mentioned the ASTM-E230. Is there anything else we need to talk about as far as the accuracy standards, or did we already hit it?
EV: Certainly, in the ASTM-E230, they spell out the different types of thermocouples, as I mentioned, the base metal thermocouples, but the accuracy of each one of those is listed in the ASTM-E230.
DG: What about classification? Let's talk about the guidelines for classifying these different thermocouples.
EV: Again, ASTM-E230, and there are other publications, but, again, we use ASTM here. The classification of the thermocouples are also spelled out in ASTM-E230 and basically, we talk about special limits of error, standard limits of error and extension grade thermocouple. Again, those can be found in E230.
DG: So, when we classify those, are we classifying them based on temperature deviations or the temperature tolerances? Is that, basically, what it is?
EV: Yes. It's based on temperature tolerance. I'd like to share a quick rule of thumb for classification of those thermocouples. So, special limits of error, basically from zero degrees Fahrenheit to 500 degrees Fahrenheit, it's + or - 2 degrees, and above 500 degrees it is + or - .4%. For example, at 1000 degrees, you're looking at + or - 4 degrees; if you have 2000 degrees Fahrenheit, the tolerance at 2000 would be + or - 8 degrees for special limits of error.
On the other side of that, you've got standard limits of error, and, basically, you could just double that. From zero to 500 degrees Fahrenheit, you're talking + or - 4 degrees; at 1000 degrees would be + or - 8 degrees and at 2000 degrees, + or -16 degrees.
Where there is some confusion, and maybe some people don't understand thermocouples, is when we talk about extension grade. There are actually two types of extension grade. There are standard limits of error and special limits of error extension grade. Extension grade is just exactly as it sounds. It carries that signal from your sensor all the way back to instrumentation rather than run maybe a little more expensive wire all the back to your instrumentation, you're going to put extension grade to continue that circuit back to the instrumentation. Extension grade is the same metals as the thermocouples. If you're using Type K sensor, then you're going to want to use Type K extension grade, and so on, for the rest of the base metal thermocouples. The difference is that the extension grade material is only guaranteed to meet the tolerances up to 400 degrees Fahrenheit. If you look at ASTM-E230, the tolerances only go, on extension grade, to 400 degree Fahrenheit. And, actually, Type T is a little bit different; Type T only goes to 200.
DG: In the heat treat industry, that's not really going to do us much good, right? I mean, most of our processes are well above 400.
EV: It is. That's why you would never use an extension grade as the actual sensor. This is some of the confusion out in the industry: “Well, I can just take my extension grade, create a junction and use it to measure temperature.” You probably could up to 400 degrees, but it's not guaranteed above that temperature, and you could get yourself in trouble.
DG: So, you run extension grade outside of the furnace because, obviously, you're not above 400, so you can use extension grade to run it. I think last time we talked about no more than 100 feet rule of thumb.
Extension grade is basically this: Here's your extension cord that you can run from your regular wire, either your standard limit of error or special limit of error, from that to the box.
EV: Exactly. And so, the key to understanding extension grade is the tolerances on that extension grade are the same – say if you have special limits extension grade – it's the same as your special limits thermocouple wire, + or - 2 degrees, in this case, up to 400. It's guaranteed to meet special limits of error and then the same thing on the standard limit side. You just double those tolerances. Again, it's really the temperature that it is guaranteed to.
DG: Very good. So those are the different classifications. We've got special limits of error, which is a tighter temperature tolerance, and then we've got standard limits of error, which is a little less tight, and they we've got our extension grade which is only classified up to 400 degrees anyhow.
I know some heat treat processes require very, very tight temperature tolerances, especially in things like aluminum brazing and things of that sort. Is it possible to get anything better than special limits of error?
EV: It is. The first thing I want to say is that they're not really recognized within ASTM, these tighter tolerances. But, in the industry, certainly in heat treating and in the pharmaceutical side where they typically use Type T, we've had many requests for tighter tolerance material. Some people call it quarter limit material or half limit material, there's a bunch of different names that it goes by. So, we go to our manufacturer's of the wire and request that and, most of the times, it's a no quote. It really comes down to more of a selection process.
For us here at Pelican Wire, we have a pretty good sized stocking program of bare conductor and sometimes what we can do is mix and match to try and meet the tighter tolerance material. There are a number of ways that some of the manufacturers, in fact, the heat treaters, will request special limits materials, that must meet + or - 2 degrees up to 1000 degrees and then .2% after that. It can be done and we do it on occasion.
DG: Let's follow up on that a little bit. How do you determine the accuracy of a lot of wire, or a spool of wire? How do you go about doing that?
EV: Let me back up just a little bit and start with the actual wire producer themselves: There are not any left in the States, so, basically, all the thermocouple wires are melted overseas, whether it be Germany, France, Sweden. When they melt, they try to meet special limits of error. Now you're talking each leg has to be melted separately; they don't melt them all at one time, right? So, each “melt” or “heat”, they are shooting to make special limits of error.
This is where some of the testing specifications come into play. ASTME-207 is a test method for single thermal element thermocouple wire. I don't want to confuse our listeners, but, again, if you think about a melter that just melted or heated a melt of wire and they process it down to wire, they only have one conductor. They want to know if that one conductor is going to potentially meet special limits of error. There is a testing specification that ASTM has (ASTME-207) that you can test a single leg thermocouple wire to see if it's going to meet special limits of error. What they do is they calibrate the single leg, they get their values (the EMF output), and they have the second other leg and they do the same thing. They, then, mathematically add the EMF of those two and go back and look at the standards to see if it's going to fall within the special limits of error.
That's how the melters, the folks that are melting the individual thermocouple legs, are doing it. We users, we are an insulator wire, we put the two legs together and now we have a thermocouple. The way we test those thermocouples is by using an ASTME-220, which is a comparison method. We're taking a known standard and we're calibrating the thermocouple wire against that standard and getting the temperature deviation from that. That's how we verify that the wire is meeting the tolerance that is requested by our customers, whether it's special limits of error, standard limits of error or even extension grade.
DG: When you say "a standard", what does that test actually look like? Are you taking a thermocouple that you know is good, sticking it in a hot furnace and your test thermocouple or are you just doing it through current testing or something like that?
EV: Good question. We actually use SPRTs (resistance thermocouples) high accuracy, that we use as our standard. They're calibrated at an outside firm, so we know what the output of that resistance thermometer is, and we calibrate our sample against that. The three things you need to do a temperature calibration is the temperature medium, the reference thermometer and the equipment to capture that output or measure the voltage that's being produced. Having those, we have our reference standard that we know the EMF or the temperature output of. Now, we put our thermocouple in the furnace and we compare the two. That's how you get your deviation.
DG: There are labs, I understand, that do these certifications and things of that sort, that certify the accuracy of the thermocouple. Now, Pelican Wire does that. You do have a lab and you do certifications, right?
EV: We do. We calibrate the thermocouples and we produce a test report showing the deviation of the thermocouple for the customer.
DG: Earlier, we were talking about standards and how there's the organization ASTM. How about for these labs? Do the labs have to meet some sort of outside third party certification?
EV: There is nothing that they have to do. I will say that there are a number of standards. We're ISO9001, but we're also seeking accreditation for 17025 so that our lab is accredited to IECISO17025, which just proves that we are a quality lab. We have our quality systems in place. We have our uncertainty budgets for all the equipment we use. A customer can feel confident that the calibration report that we provide is as accurate as possible.
DG: I think covers most of the things we wanted to cover in this episode. We talked about the standardization, the special limits of error, the standard limits of error, who are the bodies out there that do the certifications/classifications, if you will. I think we covered a good bit.
I think we were going to do one more episode, Ed, and I think we're going to talk about insulating materials. I understand that one of your colleagues is going to be there to talk about that with us, John Niggle.
EV: Yes. John Niggle will join the next podcast and talk a little bit about how now that we have the thermocouple wire, what kind of insulations do we put on that wire. It depends on the medium that it's going to be used in, the heat treater or whoever.
Doug Glenn
Publisher Heat TreatToday
To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio and look in the list of Heat Treat Radio episodes listed.
Heat TreatToday publisher Doug Glenn sits down with Ed Valykeo from Pelican Wire in the first of a three-part series on all-things thermocouples. This first episode covers the history, types, vocabulary, and other basics of understanding how thermocouples work.
Below, you can either listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or you can read an edited transcript.
The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.
Doug Glenn (DG): Ed, why don't you take a minute, as we typically do on these interviews, to talk briefly about you and your background especially your qualifications for talking about thermocouples.
Ed Valykeo (EV): I've actually been in the wire and cable industry for a little over 40 years now. I actually first started in the industry as, well maybe not a grunt, but certainly I was called a “melter's helper.” I worked at a company called Hoskins Manufacturing in Ann Arbor, Michigan where we actually melted the raw materials to make thermocouple wire, resistance wire, and a whole host of other things. I was actually the guy that, after we got done pouring that molten metal into the molds to make the ingots, was cleaning up all the mess that happens after you pour and you're pulling those ingots.
That's really where my career started, with Hoskins. As a matter of fact, it kind of ran in the family. My dad retired at Hoskins with 42 years of service with Hoskins, so it was kind of a natural progression that, eventually after I got out of the service, I ended up joining Hoskins. I was there about 18 years at Hoskins Manufacturing, again, starting out right at the bottom. I worked my way up to becoming an associate engineer working in the R&D department. That's where my career really started focusing a little more on thermocouples. I enjoyed working with thermocouples. We were developing some new products using thermocouple wire and things like that.
Ever since then, I've kind of stayed in thermocouple arena at some of the other places I've worked. After I left Hoskins, I started working for companies that insulated wire. So, we were taking the wire, like we made at Hoskins, and we were putting a whole host of insulations on it from ceramic braid to extruded products and things like that. And, again, both the companies, and even the one I'm currently employed with at Pelican, but before that I was working for a company out in New Hampshire called PMC, are real similar, it's just we insulated wire. So, we purchased the raw materials (raw wire from Hoskins or whoever) and then insulated it.
DG: For the unbaptized in this topic, what are thermocouples, how do they work, how do they come about, and then are the modern-day thermocouples any different than the thermocouples of old?
EV: I always start out with a little bit of history about thermocouples, whenever I'm talking about them, just to give people background. Thermocouples were introduced in the early 1800's with the most significant developments taking place in Europe.
One of the very first gentleman that worked on it was Alessandro Volta. You can probably recognize the name because Volta actually is the volt, today, which everybody recognizes, not just with thermocouples but, obviously, in the electrical industry too. He basically built a couple thermopiles using metals, silver and zinc and some cloth in between them, soaking them in salt water, and discovered that it would produce a voltage. That's kind of how it got started. The significance of that discovery was that there is a source of steady and reliable current flow from using dissimilar metals and saltwater and things like that.
Over the years, many others have experimented with the phenomenon. Probably the most famous, anybody that's in the thermocouple industry will hear it a lot, in 1821, Thomas [Johann] Seebeck announced that he had discovered that when two dissimilar metals were placed in a closed loop and one of those junctions was exposed to a change in temperature, electrical current was produced. This production of the electromotive force and electromatic force is the electric current is known as "the Seebeck effect" or "Seebeck coefficient." It was, obviously, much later, before everything was understood and correct mathematics, but Seebeck's name will always and forever be associated with the discovery of thermoelectricity and thermocouples. Again, even to this day, even ASTM books reference Seebeck coefficient.
Some other gentlemen that we involved, again you'll recognize some of these, were Michael Faraday, Georg Ohm, Claude Pouillet, and Antoine [César] Becquerel. It was Becquerel, actually, that suggested using Seebeck's discovery for measuring high temperatures. He proposed the strength of the current generated was proportional to the change in temperature in exactly the principle behind the thermocouple. We're measuring temperature, whether it's 200 degrees or 2300 degrees. That's how the modern day thermocouple got started way back in the early 1800's.
DG: And the modern-day thermocouples are, essentially, the same as that? Have there been any major changes?
EV: In reality, Type J was the first thermocouple to really be experimented with. After Type J, then some additional thermocouple types came on board. People experimented with other metallurgical compositions to develop different millable outputs.
DG: Let me understand: Type J, what that basically the first type of thermocouple that was developed?
EV: Let me back up a little bit. Actually, the early metal thermocouples were based on what we can call noble metals. Noble metals are rare earth elements such as platinum, rhodium, tungsten and uranium. The problem with the noble metals is that noble metals are much more expensive than our base metal thermocouples, or what we call base metal thermocouples, today. Base metal thermocouples, today, typically the compositions are just a handful of elements. You have iron, nickel, chromium, copper and things like that, which is considerably cheaper than the noble metals, the platinum and rhodium and things like that.
DG: I want to learn this history a little bit, because it's just kind of fascinating to me. So, the very first ones were made of noble metals, primarily. So, they would put those together and then, basically, we said, "This is great but it's way too expensive. Can we get the same effect, if you will, (the difference in voltage, or whatever, between dissimilar metals), if we use a little less expensive metals?"
EV: Right.
DG: You’ve said there is a difference voltage when there's a difference in temperature.
EV: The EMF (electromotive force) generated by the thermocouple is linear. So, at 200 degrees, it produces this amount of voltage, at 300 degrees, it produces this much. All the thermocouples are, basically, the same principle. It's very linear. That's one thing that is good about a thermocouple- the EMF output is linear. You aren't producing a millivoltage at 200 degrees and then at 300 it goes down and then at 500 it goes back up; it's linear proportional to the temperature.
DG: I have heard in the past, and you mentioned it here, maybe we can discuss it a little bit: noble metal versus base metal. Obviously, we know noble metals, you mentioned what those are. Those are expensive; they work to do the same thing. Base metals, though, tend to be what? Which metals?
EV: As I already mentioned, the nickel, chromium, copper, and others.
DG: And those are, in fact, just less expensive, right? Essentially, they do the same thing but they're less expensive.
EV: Exactly. But, there are some other differences, too, between the noble metals and the base metal thermocouples. When you're talking noble metals, the platinum and the rhodium, and things like that, they can handle much higher temperatures than even the base metal thermocouples.
DG: I'm going to make an assumption, but probably the vast majority of the thermocouples used in the heat treat industry are probably base metal, although, I'm sure they've got some specialized ones for high temperature, which probably jump into noble metals.
EV: Absolutely. A lot of the base metal thermocouples are used in the load sensors where they're putting multiple sensors in and then the oven may be controlled by a noble metal.
DG: The different types of thermocouples. You mentioned, and I've forgotten the letter already, that there are different types. Was it Type J you mentioned?
EV: Yes, Type J.
DG: OK. We've done a study recently asking about what's the most popular one in the heat treat industry, but I know we listed down there J, E, K, N, and T. Can you run us through those and tell us what are the differences, and whatnot?
EV: J, E, K, N and T are the most common noble metal thermocouples. Obviously, you've got two dissimilar metals or, what we refer to in thermocouples, two legs of the thermocouple – the positive leg and the negative leg. So, for instance, on a Type J thermocouple, you're using iron as a positive leg, which is basically pure iron, (there are some coatings on the iron to help against oxidation and things like that), and the other leg is a copper nickel alloy. That makes up the two legs of the Type J thermocouple.
If we look at Type K thermocouple, the negative leg is the KN which is, basically, just high nickel with a little bit of chromium; the KP leg, or the positive, of Type K is higher content nickel chromium. There are also some other minor elements.
With Type T, the positive leg is pure copper. The TN leg is, again, a copper nickel alloy. So, when we talk about Type E, what is interesting is that with the Type E thermocouple, you're actually taking the Type KP leg and matching it with the TN leg. So, again, it's just a mismatch or some hodgepodge of some legs.
DG: So, you're using some lingo that I'm just picking up on and I want to make sure our listener's are, as well. You talk about a P and an N leg. Obviously, you didn't say it, but you're talking about a positive leg and a negative leg.
EV: Yes, I'm sorry. KP and KN. So it's K positive and K negative leg.
DG: Great. So, with the Type E, you're taking a few and switching them around and matching them up and seeing what you can come up with.
EV: Yes, that's the E, and I already mentioned the T. N is a relatively newcomer to the thermocouple industry. I say new, but it's still probably 40 or 50 years, I'm not sure when it was developed. But, again, the Type N is similar to the Type K where the KP leg is a nickel and the KN leg is nickel and some silicon. So, it's just a little bit different composition from the Type K thermocouple. But, there are some differences.
Some of the differences, when you're looking at the different types of thermocouples, for example, Type E has the highest EMF output of any of the thermocouples. Your question might be, "Well, why wouldn't we just use Type E because it has the highest output?" What the higher EMF output means is that the sensitivity is a little bit greater in the Type E thermocouple. Then why wouldn't we use that throughout all the industries? Well, the short answer is, a couple things: Type E has a limited temperature range, because, again, you're using that TN leg which is copper nickel alloy and the melting point of a copper nickel alloy is much lower than a nickel chromium alloy. So, that's some of the differences, and with all the thermocouple types, also.
Each one has their own EMF output at certain temperatures but one of the biggest considerations is, really, the environment that you're using the thermocouples in. Type K has good oxidation resistance; Type J, not so much, because you've got a pure iron leg which is going to oxidize much faster. That's some of the differences between the individual thermocouple types.
DG: I assume that if there's oxidation, or any type of corrosion or anything of that sort, it's going to change the EMF, it's going to change the reading and therefore that thermocouple, out the door she goes.
EV: Absolutely. And there have been even some recent changes in some of the specifications that some of the heat treaters are using nowadays where they finally realize that these thermocouples do deteriorate over time and so they start limiting the amount of uses that each thermocouple can be used in, in a bunch of different applications, but heat treating mainly.
DG: Let's pause for just a second and do a little vocabulary. You've mentioned EMF a couple of different times. Could we have just a brief review of that just to make sure? Also, I've heard about millivolts. Are those two things related? If so, how?
EV: EMF stands for electromotive force. It is, basically, when two dissimilar metals are put in contact with each other, a small voltage is generated. When we're talking about millivolts, that's exactly what we're looking at: a millivolt is 1/1000 of a volt. It's a very small amount. If you look at some of the millivolt outputs for some of these thermocouples, at 200 degrees, for example, you're putting out .560 of a millivolt. So, these are small.
DG: And you're saying that it was the Type E that has the highest millivolt of all, so the current that is produced between those dissimilar metals is the highest, but you can't always use that one because in certain temperature ranges you're going to melt one of the legs.
EV: Exactly.
DG: The millivolts are measured by what? I mean, it goes into an instrument that is able to read that? What is that instrument?
EV: Actually, some DVMs (digital volt meters) have the capacity to measure in the millivolt range. So, it could be as simple as a digital voltmeter. But, in the industry, we have temperature controllers, things like that, that you hook a thermocouple up to and it measures the EMF and then it converts it into a temperature.
DG: It will measure that millivolt and then tell us what the temperature is?
EV: Right. With the instrumentation nowadays, it has the formulas in its memory, or whatever, and can convert that millivolt into an actual temperature that you actually read on a meter.
DG: We've got an EMF which is measured in a millivolt. It's going to travel across a long wire, I assume, to some place where it's going to be read. Let's talk about that wire a little bit. The impact of this, whatever EMF is being created, millivolt, what about that wire? Tell me about it and what do we need to be careful of, etc?
EV: We're actually saving that for another podcast, but I will touch on it a little bit. So, there are limitations on the length of the thermocouple. There are a lot of different mindsets, but probably the one I've heard the most is no longer than 100 feet. So, you have your thermocouple sensor and that arrangement, the configuration, can be a number of ways. At PMC Corp. we insulate the wire. You could just take that insulation off at the end, weld the junction there, stick it and [. . .] then run it to a meter.
But in other industries, you may have it in a ceramic tube because of the temperature it's being used at. You have a ceramic tube with a connector at the end, you may run what we consider an extension wire from that point all the way back to your instrumentation. Again, the general rule of thumb, is 100 feet.
DG: Let's talk about that wire with the different types of thermocouples. What do we need to be sensitive to? What do we need to be careful about?
EV: Again, temperature range is probably the first consideration, but then also the environment that it's in. Again, each thermocouple has its limitations on the environment. Some are good in a vacuum, other thermocouples are not good in a vacuum. Some thermocouples are good just in air, (like Type K), but Type J is not so good. It still can be used in air but it will oxidize faster.
Like I said, in an environment of a vacuum, some thermocouple elements will actually leech out or evaporate out and that definitely would cause a problem with the EMF output and would have an erroneous reading. Certain acids you can use some thermocouples in, others you can't.
DG: With all of this pyrometry stuff going around, especially the AMS2750 revision, there are a lot of places where the tightness of the tolerance on the temperature really needs to be paid attention to. Are some thermocouples inherently tighter tolerance, where they can go down to + or –2, or less than that?
[blockquote author="Ed Valykeo, Pelican Wire" style="2"]Special limits of error is the tightest tolerance, and that's according to ASTM. But, there are some customers and some companies that want tighter tolerance material. So, when we talk about that, that's really a special order. Now you have to back all the way back up to the melters that melt these elements and make the thermocouple wire. It's on them to produce something that is a tighter tolerance. [/blockquote]
EV: Again, that was something we were going to touch on a little bit later, maybe on another podcast, because it can be a whole category on its own.
But, yes. If you think about in general, overall, when we're thinking about the different thermocouple types, they basically all have the same tolerances according to ASTM. The rule of thumb, that we kind of use, is from say 200 degrees to 500 degrees, the tolerance on all thermocouples are + or - 2 degrees if you want special limits of air material.
Now, there are other tolerances. In the thermocouple industry, you’ll here – at least calibration-wise – you'll hear special limits of error, standard limits of error and extension grade. Special limits of error is the tightest tolerance, and that's according to ASTM. But, there are some customers and some companies that want tighter tolerance material. So, when we talk about that, that's really a special order. Now you have to back all the way back up to the melters that melt these elements and make the thermocouple wire. It's on them to produce something that is a tighter tolerance. Once that metal is poured in that mold and it's processed down the wire, it is what it is. When they calibrate that wire, you can't really do a lot with it to change the EMF output, per se, other than there are some heat treat operations that can, what they call, stabilize, and there are processes to oxidize thermocouple wire, and things like that, but you're pretty much stuck with EMF right from the melt.
DG: And it's dependent on the material composition or quality of the material.
EV: Absolutely. In some cases, they may melt 10 melts to get 2 special limit of air thermocouple types. I don't think it's quite that bad, bur from my early melting days, we've had to downgrade many a melt because it didn't quite meet the tolerances.
DG: Just reviewing, we talked about the basic history, how they got started. We talked about the difference between noble versus base metal thermocouples. We talked about the different types. We defined EMF, electromotive force. We talked about millivolt a little bit. We talked about the wire, the differences in what we need to pay attention to as far as wire, and some other considerations like temperature range, calibration tolerance and environment.
EV: Just so you know, the only base metal thermocouples there are, at least what ASTM recognizes, are the Type J, E, K, T and N. We covered all the base metal thermocouples.
DG: Just out of curiosity, a noble metal thermocouple, what are those?
EV: There is a fairly large list of those. You've probably heard of thermocouple Type R or Type S thermocouple. Those are all made with noble metal thermocouples. It's not really considered a base metal, but tungsten uranium thermocouples. Those are in more the noble metal category Type C. There is even development of some other additional noble metals: gold is used. Thermocouples are made out of gold.
DG: Those could be expensive. Of course, some of those other metals are more expensive than gold, so, who knows?
Well, that's very interesting. So, J, E, K, N and T are all base metal thermocouples.
I want to make sure that we give appropriate credit to your company. We talked about the fact that you're from Pelican Wire, part of the wire expert group. I want to make sure that our listeners know that they can go check out your website which is pelicanwire.com. You're not obligated to do so, but would you like to give out any other information where they can get a hold of you?
EV: Yes. Through the Pelican website, you can certainly get a hold of me. Our number is on the website. It's 239-597-8555 and it goes through a central board. If anyone wants me, they can just ask for me through the operator.
Doug Glenn
Publisher Heat TreatToday
To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio and look in the list of Heat Treat Radio episodes listed.
Heat TreatToday publisher Doug Glenn and Marc Glasser of Rolled Alloys on why choosing the cheapest material is not always the best way to go. Listen to some of the practical tips Mr. Glasser gives for choosing the right alloy for your application.
Below, you can either listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or you can read an edited transcript.
The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.
Doug Glenn (DG): We're going to talk today about something that Marc and I had talked about that kind of caught my attention that I thought might be of interest to our listeners, and that's this whole idea that sometimes buying the cheapest material isn't always the best option. So, that's the topic, but, before we do that, Marc, I want you to tell our listeners and/or viewers a little bit about yourself, your background, and what you're currently doing.
Marc Glasser (MG): I have been a metallurgist or material scientist for forty years. Next month will be exactly forty years since I graduated from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute with a bachelor's degree in materials engineering. After ten years of working, I went, simultaneously, to a job and to night school for five years and I obtained my Master of Science in material science from, then, Polytechnic University which is now known as the NYU School of Engineering. I've been working in all areas of metallurgy and material science. I've worked in rolling, I've worked in forging, I've worked in powder metallurgy, and I've worked in heat treating laboratories. I'm currently working in metallurgy of heat resistant materials and applications of these alloys in industry.
DG: Let's jump in then, Marc. I want to talk to you a little bit about this contention that you and I talked about that sometimes, but not all the time, expensive is better and buying the cheapest isn't always the best. In a nutshell, what are you trying to say on that?
MG: I'll take it even one step further: Expensive is cheaper. Let me expand on that. You have a part and it's a certain price and you know you have a life of two years. . . so that's cost X. You have alloy #2 that's going to cost 60% more. It's going to have a life of eight years. Again, you're going to pay 60% more for this part than you would for the first part of the less expensive alloy. But, over the operating life of that less expensive alloy, you're going to have to replace it three times. You're going to use four separate components. So, 60% of the cost times four, you're spending 240% more than you would spend on one component that's a little more.
It's cheaper up front, but over the entire life cycle of the part, buying four more parts of the cheaper one is a lot more expensive.
DG: Let's talk about some of those hidden factors that come into play when you're analyzing the true cost of selecting those materials. Do you have a couple of examples?
MG: Absolutely. The most stark example, that we made our first case history on, is radiant tubes. For years, the alloy of choice on radiant tubes was a wrought 601 thin wall and you get about two years on it in a typical furnace. Then the casting industry came in and, because of limitations of the machinery, they had to go with a heavier wall that was three times as thick and that cost 30% more, but it got four years of life. Now, there's newer technology and they can cast it a lot thinner, but thinner doesn't last as long. So, for the wrought tube, you're talking about 1/8 of an inch wall thickness. With cast, for the four-year version, is about 3/8 of an inch and if you go down to 1/4 inch or less, you get maybe two or two-and-a-half years and if you go to the more expense wrought alloy, (again, you're talking about 1/8 inch wall), it's 60% more than the original one, 30% more than the cast, and you get eight years out of it.
Now, again, these numbers are based just on the cost of the material. But, you've got to dig a little deeper because you're not capturing the true savings of using the more expensive material because, think of this: If you've been in a heat treating shop and you know your carburizing furnaces, you have to turn it off, cool it down, let it air out because you've got a carbonaceous gas in there and any residual carbon monoxide, if you go in there, you're going to asphyxiate.
The bottom line is, the turnaround can take up to a week. Each time you have to go down for a week, what everybody doesn't even think about is how much revenue in sales and/or in profits are you losing from that week down? And, if you're going from cast to the better wrought alloy, you're talking about one week. If you're still going with the original less alloyed, thinner wrought tube, that's three times. Those savings can be much larger, depending on the facility, than just the material cost; it's just a few thousand dollars. I don't know how to evaluate how many tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars of lost production would be, but each shop has to consider that. They know the numbers; those are proprietary numbers that need to be considered.
With muffles, it's the same kind of analysis because you have the same alloys except muffles are not typically cast. But, let me give you an example. A lot of muffles operate at 2125 and, again, you use a 601 muffle. They're going to stay perfectly straight and flat at that temp for about six months. At that point, the typical shop will start seeing a little bit of roof sag and it will sag more and more and more. But there's plenty of room, so you can get a lot of sag before it starts interfering with the parts being conveyed. So, my general rule from the shops that I've seen, is that it can sag for about three times as long as it stays straight before the sagging is too great and has to be removed. Typically, it's about two years. With the better alloy, again, the case that I've seen was two years without any sagging and that was a higher temperature.
What we've done is we've actually gone to good customers who understand the concept and we work with them on developing case history. They log in when they put it in and the log in when they take it out. They have good records, number one.
Now, I'm talking predicted metal temperature based off the process temperature which could be more or less because it's estimated. But I know that the one that we looked at was at least 2200 on the metal temperature. And this was one of the really crazy ones because it was replacing a cast material of much higher quality cast material and the cast material was dead straight for a year-and-a-half, it would start to just creep a little, but if you're familiar with casting, there's not a lot of ductility in casting when it starts creeping maybe 3 or 4%, you don't have to worry about more creep; it ruptures! Then, the gas starts escaping and that's no good so they take it down. In this case, when you switch from the cast, the best wrought material was actually cheaper and it lasted longer and the particular customer would just change them every two years because they were still in cost savings mode. Based on my experience, I've predicted that they should be able to get at least six years on it. But, they're not willing to take that chance.
DG: The examples that you gave were the radiant tube and the muffles. I assume the same thing would be true, though, in retorts, for baskets or even fixturing systems, and things like that.
MG: Absolutely. I bring those two up because I have more good case histories.
DG: I assume the same would be somewhat true for fans, and things of that sort, if necessary, although you wouldn't be worrying so, so much about sagging and stuff like that. But anything, basically, I assume, metal.
MG: That's correct.
DG: How about measuring the life cycle of materials components? Any tips or tricks you've got for people on how exactly to do that and to get an accurate estimate?
MG: What we've done is we've actually gone to good customers who understand the concept and we work with them on developing case history. They log in when they put it in and the log in when they take it out. They have good records, number one. We've worked with others who've wanted it to work but they didn't do so good of a job tracking it. In one case, it was a much larger furnace where they had many radiant tubes and they were just working with a few of them. Personnel changed – one person didn't let the next person know about the trial and the identity got lost. So, we spent a lot of time for nothing. But, what we learned on that one is something real simple: You take a welder and you weld the alloy name somewhere on the tube and that's not going to wear away. Assuming you choose the right consumable, that weld is not going to go away.
DG: You already gave a couple of examples, but let me ask you this: How about a few concrete examples of where a more expensive material produced an overall more cost effective part? You already kind of gave us those back with the radiant tube, but are there any others that you've got along that line?
MG: The radiant tube is a great example. Muffles and retorts. We've been trying to work with some people on larger heat treating trays, but, again, there the task people have done a pretty good job, so we're trying to find a few people willing to go out on a limb and try something better.
Here, the concept is the idea of something lighter so that we don't look as much about the cost of the component. If you go with a lighter fixture, your furnace has a weight capacity and if you cut your weight 20-30%, you can put more parts on it and have more of your furnace BTUs going to heat treat parts instead of fixturing. When you're putting BTUs into parts, you're talking more profit per part.
DG: Right. You're not spending as much time, basically, using a basket as a heat sink, or something like that.
MG: Exactly. And, that's a concept that I introduced at one of the conferences about a year and a half ago. These things take time to percolate before they're accepted by people.
DG: Speaking of acceptance, let me ask you this question: Are these concepts that we've been talking about, the idea that sometimes less expensive is not better, is it widely accepted, do you think? I mean, do you think people understand it, generally speaking?
MG: Some people do. Not as much as I'd like to see! The other obstacle you're looking at is when you're looking at four years versus eight years and you look at some of the larger companies, you may have personnel turnover and one person doesn't want his 'replacement' to get all the credit. These are things that were learned the hard way. You have to get the right people to try it. A family-owned business is a perfect place.
I can give you another real good example on heat treating baskets where it made a difference. I'm going to give the name because I have done papers with him at a conference on this subject so I don't think it's taboo. I work with Solar Atmospheres on a basket for an extremely high temperature heat treating process that was slightly under 2300 degrees Fahrenheit. (We can say that because it's in the case history.) The first baskets that he used were your traditional Inconel 600 601 and they were supporting heavy parts. After five cycles, they had to cut all the sides off, hand straighten them (each of the sides) and weld it back together. That's timely. So, he went to another alloy, a better alloy, a competitor's alloy (HR120), and got ten cycles on it. He was very happy. Then, one of the people at their headquarters heard me give a talk on this new alloy that we had, our 602CA, which we trademark as RA602CA, and he got excited. He started asking me questions after the presentation and we eventually got kicked out of the room because it went well beyond the break; so we continued out in the hall as we walked to our company's booth and we talked. It took about ten to twelve months before they were ready to try it. We worked with their fabricator to get the material. They were up to forty-five cycles before they straightened it and there's a catch, though, to that. At forty-five cycles, they probably could've continued, but during the pandemic in 2020, when things were slow, they made a smart business decision that this would be a great time to do the straightening. I can't fault them, but it would have been nice to know just how many more. But, at forty-five versus ten, it is probably a similar cost at the time of manufacture. That's a no-brainer.
DG: So, we've covered some of the basics. We understand that it's not necessarily widely accepted so people should pay attention to some of these things that you've said. Are there any other economic factors that you think people aren't necessarily taking into consideration when they're doing material selection, besides the things we've talked about. Initial cost, life cycle, cost of replacement, and those types of things. Is there anything else that they ought to be thinking about?
As I mentioned in one of the cases, when there is significant down time to replace a part, you've got to consider how much money you're not bringing in because you're down for a week, or however long it is. This is often overlooked, as well.
MG: As I mentioned in one of the cases, when there is significant down time to replace a part, you've got to consider how much money you're not bringing in because you're down for a week, or however long it is. This is often overlooked, as well.
DG: To me, that's cost of replacement, because that's not just a hard replacement cost, but the downtime replacement, right?
MG: It's a little less obvious, though.
DG: Those are all good thoughts, Marc. When people go to do material selection, keep some of these things in mind. It's not just a matter of what the buyer, the purchaser guy, sees coming across his desk and comparing those two costs, let's talk about the material properties and longevity of the product and things of that sort.
I know that you, being with Rolled Alloys, you guys help customers, I imagine, pretty much continually on things like this. If people want to get in touch with you or Rolled Alloys, how is it best to do that?
MG: There are a couple of ways. The first way is my email: mglasser@rolledalloys.com. You can always ask me a question. On our website, there is a link to ask a metallurgist a question. I believe, you can also go www.metallurgical-help@rolledalloys.com and that will bring you to one of the metallurgists in my department and somebody will get an answer to you .
DG: Thank you very much, Marc. I appreciate your expertise. We'll hope it's helpful to the heat treat world.
MG: Doug, I thank you for having me as your guest and I look forward to more conversations with you.
Doug Glenn
Publisher Heat TreatToday
To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio and look in the list of Heat Treat Radio episodes listed.
Doug Glenn, publisher of Heat TreatToday, moderates a panel of 5 experts who address questions about the next 5-10 years in the heat treat industry. What are the trends and what should you prepare for. Experts include Peter Sherwin, Eurotherm by Schneider Electric; Janusz Kowaleski, Ipsen Group; Andrew Bassett, Aerospace Testing & Pyrometry; and Dan Herring, the Heat Treat Doctor from The HERRING GROUP, Inc.
You can view this special video edition of Heat Treat Radio by clicking the button below.
Heat Treat Radio host Doug Glenn sits down to talk with Johan Hjärne about high pressure heat treating and an e-book recently published by Heat Treat Today in cooperation with Quintus Technologies. Learn more about high pressure heat treating in this informative interview.
Below, you can either listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or you can read an edited transcript.
The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.
Doug Glenn(DG): For this edition of Heat Treat Radio, I have the great pleasure of sitting down with Johan Hjärne (JH) from Quintus Technologies. Let's give the listeners a sense of who you are, how long you've been in the industry and your experience with HIPing. If you don't mind, please introduce yourself.
JH: Absolutely, thank you so much, Doug, for that introduction. My name is Johan Hjärne and I work for Quintus Technologies. I've been with the company for around 10 years now. I started up where we have our head office, which is in Västerås, Sweden, 10 years ago as an R&D manager there. Later, I had other roles like product manager for our hot isostatic presses. I also worked as a global business development manager, responsible for the strategies for a couple of years, and since four years ago, I'm now the business unit director for Quintus Technologies here in the American region. I am responsible for our hot and cold isostatic presses and also our other business unit which is called Sheet Metal Forming Presses. Before I joined Quintus, I worked within the aerospace industry for 10 years.
DG: I've been to your office, but I want everyone else to know: You guys are located just north of Columbus, Ohio.
JH: That's absolutely correct. It is a little suburb of Columbus called Lewis Center just north of Columbus.
DG: The reason we decided to get together on this podcast was because you and I and our respective teams have just successfully completed the publication of an eBook, which basically we've entitled “High Pressure Heat Treatment.” It deals with HIPing and some other things. So, that's the occasion for this meeting. I want to ask you to discuss, briefly, with us about high pressure heat treating. What is it and why did we decide to do this eBook on it?
JH: A very good question. As I indicated before, I have a background in the aerospace industry and when I worked there we were responsible for some components in a jet engine. We had big castings and we typically 'HIPed and shipped' these castings. HIPing, to at least us in the aerospace where I worked at the time, was like a black box. We really didn't know. We knew that the results were better if we HIPed, we could use less material, the material got stronger, etc, etc. So, when I started at Quintus, at the same time we had made some progress with increasing the cooling rate in our HIP system.
A HIP system basically works in a way where you apply a high temperature and high pressure and then you cool down, and during this process you take away the pores. We had realized that the cooling part of this cycle could be shortened drastically with some updates of the equipment. At the same time, additive manufacturing started to grow. They started, after awhile, to understand and realize that even though the process of additive manufacturing is a brilliant process, (you can do fantastic things in a short period of time), many times they ended up with porosity in the parts.
The aerospace industry, the medical implant industry, and others required that these pores be taken away. So, they reached out to us and wondered what we could do about this. When we said that the HIP cycle is perfect, you can remove the porosity from your part, they started to ask questions like, “Why do I need to heat treat it afterwards? Why do I need to do something else afterwards? Isn't this enough without gas to remove the porosity?” That is where we started to add one and one together to see, well, the cooling rates we can apply in our modern HIP system might actually be good enough to do this heat treat section. So, for materials that were suitable for this, we started to elaborate, and that is how we started to work with this and development it more and more.
DG: Let's talk about the difference, then, between traditionally HIPing and what this high pressure heat treatment is. Process-wise, what is the difference?
JH: Process-wise, as I explained a little bit briefly before, the HIP process is basically increasing the temperature in the furnace, or in the pressure vessel, and then we apply a high pressure. After the material has been under these conditions, we need to cool the pressure vessel to be able to take out these parts. The next step, in many cases, is a similar heat treat process, but without any pressure. So, basically, after the HIP step, you take out the parts from the HIP and you redo almost the same cycle, without pressure, just to be able to cool it faster and get the correct material properties. When we realized that this cooling step was high enough and that we can do it already in the HIP system, then we could basically remove that subsequent solutionizing step. Basically, it is applying the same cooling rate, as they had in the solutionized step, directly in the HIP unit. Combining these two is what we call high pressure heat treatment.
The systems we have are also capable of running pressure and temperature independently. If we take an additive part which is being printed on a build plate, you can, in principle, take that build plate, put it in one of our HIP systems, you can run a stress relief cycle to begin with where you only use an elevated temperature without any pressure whatsoever, you can increase the pressure and the temperature when you want to go into the HIP cycle, you can quench it down to do the solutionizing step and you can even, if you find it reasonable, do an aging step. This whole process could, in principle, remove four different steps. It is always a question of do you want to take the whole build plate and do that, or do you want to remove the parts from the build plate before you HIP and heat treat it, and so on and so forth. That is always up to the customers. The machines we provide are capable of taking care of the whole process, of doing it all.
DG: Doing it all- stress relief, HIP, age, or whatever. Just for clarity sake, you've got a typical HIP process, you're going to heat it up, put it under very high pressure, then, normally, if you didn't have the high pressure heat treatment capabilities, you would have to cool that part down which is typically cooled quite slowly in a conventional HIP unit, taking more time and whatnot. It then comes down to ambient, or close to ambient, where it can be held, you take it out, you put it back in another furnace (a normal furnace, not a HIP furnace), take the temperature back up, get it to the point where you want it, quick cool it, quench it, to a certain extent, to get the characteristics that you're looking for, and you're done. What we're talking about here is the combination of those two processes plus potential other things like stress relief, and all that, in a single unit, correct?
JH: Yes. This has very beneficial effects on time. Many of the HIP vendors do not have HIP and heat treatment in the same facility. Now we have sold a couple of units to some new HIP vendors that have this capacity, but, historically, the HIP vendors didn't have both HIP and heat treatment. First, the customer had to send it to a service provider for HIPing, they got the part back, they had to send it to somebody that could do the heat treat step, and then got the part back, and so on. The time, and specifically for additive manufacturing, is important. Keep in mind they can do a part pretty fast, anywhere between a day to two days, worst case a week, but then having to wait week after week after week to get the part back for the HIPing or for the heat treating.
DG: So there's a substantial, potential time savings, for sure; not just process savings in between furnaces, but the fact that you can buy one furnace and do both of those things.
Let's talk for just a second about what types of products are most effectively HIPed and/or, if we can, high pressure heat treated.
JH: As I said before, we really started to realize the potential with this technology with the additive manufacturing world. That is were we started to realized that we can actually make a difference here. Not only does it have a beneficial effect for the total time, but having the components under elevated temperature for a shorter period of time is actually beneficial for the microstructure; the grain doesn't grow as much. You can take the example, again, with the first HIP cycle with having that at a certain temperature, you cool it down slowly then you heat it up again to the same high temperature for a period of time before you quench it down. Well, then you exaggerate the component for high temperature under a much longer period. If you can do that in just one step, the component doesn't have to be in as high a temperature for such a long period of time which means that the grains don't grow as much which gives you a better microstructure and better material properties. That is one effect.
Another effect that we have realized is very beneficial is that when you're dealing with additive manufacturing, you end up, specifically if it's laser powder bed fusion, you end up with Argon in the pores and Argon cannot be dissolved into the material. With a HIPing process, the Argon pores are basically eliminated, in a way. However, if you heat it up again, these pores start to grow and they can grow back again and be bigger. So, if you remove that heat treat step afterwards, you don't have to be afraid of this pore growth again. That's another beneficial effect, from a metallurgical standpoint, that we have realized.
Additive manufacturing is very well suited for this. With that said, now we see a more increasing interest from the casting side, as well. With these new modern HIP units we have, we can cool with velocities of several thousand degrees per minute, a little dependent on what size, etc., but this has a very good effect on the microstructures on suitable materials like nickel-base super alloys and titanium aluminides, etc. The casting side is now starting to get very, very interested in this technology, as well, because basically it didn't exist before. We see a huge potential and we have seen an immense growth of requests for this technology the last couple of years.
DG: How about just straight powder metal? I know you're talking 3-D, but how about just straight powder metal manufacturing, because those parts tend to be a bit more porous than your normal wrought products, and things of that sort?
JH: If you talk about powder metallurgy and HIP, you typically need to have everything canned, in a way. Powder metallurgy, we call it near-net shape, for example, where you weld structures to a certain shape or form, you fill that with powder and then you HIP it and out comes a part which basically has a perfect microstructure. We haven't come so far yet to start to evaluate how that will be with this high pressure heat treat, but what we have seen with the interest of this is that a lot of the HIP cycles were developed many, many years ago. At the time, they didn't have the cooling capacity we have today and they ended up with cycles which were good, they took away the porosity. However, with the capability to modify both the temperature and the pressure, you can come to the same fully dense part. I'm over exaggerating a little bit, but if you have a high temperature, you can have a lower pressure. If you have a lower temperature, you can increase the pressure. So, we have also focused on having a very high pressure on all of our equipment because then you have this flexibility to get to the fully dense part in the best way. This is something I'm absolutely convinced that the powder metallurgy industry would be interested in and evaluating more, as well.
DG: For the people who might be interested in testing a part, or something like that, are there size restraints? Typically, what type of workzone are we talking about in a standard Quintus HIP unit?
JH: If we talk about today, what we have on the market for relatively high cooling rates, if we're talking cooling rates in the 200-300 C/minute or 400-500, almost 600 F/minute, the production units are at 2 feet diameter, give or take (660 mm), and around 6 feet high. But this is something that the next generation we are developing right now, we are approaching a meter and more than that, as well. So, it's just a matter of time to grow this. We've seen that there is the highest interest on the additive manufacturing market, which is why we have focused on that to begin with, now we're doing higher and I do not see any limitations in going up in diametrical size for this.
DG: But it is exponentially more difficult as you get wider, yes?
JH: Yes. It's a good comment you make. You have a much higher volume that you need to cool down. But, for the cooling rates, we see, at least today, most applicable where we talk about these, as I said, 200-300 C/minute, we definitely see possibilities to go over a meter in diameter and then we have large production sized HIP units. We do HIP units that are much bigger than that but if you start to get over 1 ½ meter and even bigger, then you're absolutely correct, then the cooling rates are drastically lower.
DG: Could you describe, for those who may not have ever seen or understand a HIP unit, and most specifically, a high pressure heat treatment HIP unit, what does it look like?
JH: I can start with a pressure vessel, basically. It's basically a cylinder where you put a furnace in and in this cylinder you can increase the pressure and in the furnace you can increase the temperature so you create a pressure vessel with high pressure and high temperature.
DG: And Johan, we're talking, typically, a vertical cylinder?
JH: Correct.
DG: And this high pressure vessel has a wall thickness of ….. ?
JH: That is a good question, Doug. Depending on size, of course, the wall thickness can be anywhere from a couple of inches to maybe the biggest wall thickness we have now is up to 200 millimeters, or something like that. Don't hold me to these numbers. But, the important thing is that you can do a pressure vessel design in two ways: Either you can use a very thick-walled cylinder to contain the high pressure, or you can do a thin-walled pressure vessel, and that is where the big difference is. At Quintus Technologies, we use a thin-walled pressure vessel and we apply a wire winding technology. So we pre stress this cylinder with a wire, but we can also apply cooling next to or in direct contact with this pressure vessel. What we do is create a heat exchanger with our whole system. We also apply cooling in the lower closures and in the upper closures so what you have is a water controlled pressure vessel with a furnace in and then we can actively control how fast we would like to cool the unit with controlling the cooling of the pressure vessel.
DG: I'm imaging, right away, thermal shock written all over this thing. You've got a high pressure, a vessel that's at high temperature and all of a sudden you guys slam in there because you want to drop temperatures 300-400 C, 400-500 F/minute, I'm seeing a lot of thermal shock going on. How do you deal with that?
JH: The gas that we are working with is Argon. Argon has an extremely good thermal conductivity. At high temperature it, sort of, takes care of the densification process in a very good way because it takes the heat from the gas into the material. What we then use is the colder gas in the lower region and we basically force that cold gas up into the furnace. But we don't do that with any specific high velocity. The velocities in pressure vessels are pretty moderate and continuous. And, of course, we have requirements on the pressure vessel wall. The pressure vessel walls are strictly monitored and controlled so they can never exceed certain temperatures. That's where we have our, sort of, safety function and control function.
We don't see any challenges with thermal shock. The alternative of having a thick-walled cylinder might have bigger challenges when you cool from one side. Then, you can end up with other challenges like thermal cracks, etc. But using a thin-walled solution as we do, we don't see any issues with this.
DG: The other major issue I would think you'd have with thick walls is you probably wouldn't be able to reach the cooling rates that you're talking about because you've got a huge heat sink sucking up all of that cold air.
A company that might be thinking about bringing this HIPing thing in-house and do high pressure heat treatment in-house, are they going to have to have any operational expertise? In other words, do you need to hire a PhD from Harvard, or someone like that, to operate this unit?
JH: No. Operating a HIP unit like this is not, according to Quintus, more difficult than operating other heat treat furnaces in any way. Of course you need a touch and feel for the unit, how it works, etc. This is taken care of during training when we deliver the systems. You don't have to have any PhD from Harvard to run and operate these units.
Doug, you've been in our Lewis Center office, and we have an application lab there. If someone is interested, we are more than wiling to take on customers or somebody that just wants to know more about the technology and take a look at it. They're more than welcome to contact me or Quintus and come and visit us.
The market is starting to get these machines out for operation. If you are a customer that would like to try these out and have a part that is bigger than our small lab furnaces can do, there are service providers out there on the market that can do this. We have companies like Accurate Grazing in Greenville, SC that have a couple of these units. We have Paulo up in Cleveland, OH and on the west coast we have Stack Metallurgical in Portland, OR. Even Canada has their first really fast unit now with Burloak and also Mexico has a company called HT-MX. For the bigger companies that decide to outsource, or any company that decides to outsource, this is a technology that is out there on the market.
DG: Your lab there in Lewis Center will help process or 'part validate', I assume, if somebody is interested in that? They can bring an idea, a problem or a part in development to you and you'll say, “Yes, here's what we can do and we can prove it by running it.”
JH: Absolutely. We have the thought that if somebody wants to evaluate this and are willing to work a little bit with us and maybe we can get some information back, we have this as a service for free. We are not a service provider in the sense that we compete with our customers, but if someone wants to evaluate the technology and are willing to talk with us and listen to us, this is a service we do for free.
DG: I'm going to ask you about giving out additional information where people can go to get more information, but I would like to let the listeners know that if you go to heattreattoday.com and in the search box just type in 'HIP' or 'HIPing' or 'hot isostatic pressing', you'll see a pretty healthy list of articles that appear there that aren't necessarily specific to high pressure heat treatment, just HIPing generally, but certainly there are articles there about high pressure heat treating, as well, from Quintus. You can also type Quintus into the search box and you would come up with quite a few things because you guys have provided us with some good content.
That's one place you can go if you want to find out more information. Johan, where can they go, what are you comfortable giving out as far as contact information for you and/or Quintus?
JH: Regarding information, they can go to our homepage, of course, Quintustechnologies.com. And don't forget the eBook, Doug. That's a very good description of HIPing. If you want to know more, download the eBook. That has a good description of not only high pressure heat treatment, but also HIPing and a little bit of history of HIPing.
Otherwise, you can contact me by going to the Quintus homepage and find contact information for me. We also have the application lab in Lewis Center. If it has to do with HIPing, it will end up in my in-box, sooner or later.
DG: You've got a good team there, by the way. We know some of your other folks who you work with that are very good people. If you're a listener and you're interested, you want to go to the Quintustechnologies.com homepage. You can search for Johan Hjärne on the Quintus homepage and you'll get Johan's contact information.
And yes, you make a very good point, don't forget the eBook on Heat TreatToday's site. You can get there simply by typing into your browser- heattreattoday.com/ebook and you'll go to our eBook homepage which has two eBooks on there right now, the most recent being the one from Quintus.
JH: I would also like to add something. We talked an awful lot about the U.S., but if there are any listeners from the rest of the world, we have an application lab where we have our head office in Västerås, Sweden, as well. That lab is even a little bit better equipped that our lab is, so that's a fantastic opportunity if you're not situated here in North America. We also have connections in China and Japan, but you can find more information about that on our homepage.
DG: Johan, thank you so much. Great to talk with you, thanks for your time.
Heat TreatToday publisher Doug Glenn and James Dean of Plastometrex discuss indentation plastometry, a new technique for obtaining important mechanical property values for a wide variety of materials. The company’s equipment is just barely 6-months old and is already finding its way into heat treat applications in North America.
Below, you can either listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or you can read an edited transcript.
The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.
DG: Today, we're going a bit international. We're going to have a conversation with Mr. James Dean from Plastometrex in the UK, which is obviously a far spell from Pittsburgh, where I'm located. James, welcome to Heat Treat Radio. We're looking forward to talking with you.
JD: Thanks, Doug, it's nice to be here.
DG: We want to talk about materials characterization, testing and things of that sort. We'll get into, specifically, what part of that in just a bit. But first, James, if you don't mind, briefly, let people know who you are, the qualifications you have to be talking about the topic that we will be hitting on, and about your history in the heat treat industry or in the materials characterization industry.
JD: Quick background: I'm a materials scientist from the UK. I first studied materials as a young undergraduate at Imperial College in London. That was way back in the year 2000. I subsequently went on to do a PhD in Cambridge, also in materials science. It was during that period when I really first became interested in the mechanical behavior of materials, particularly strength characteristics and the relationship between those strength characteristics and underlying microstructural features. In fact, one vivid memory that I have from an undergraduate laboratory class was measuring Vickers hardness numbers on age hardening aluminum copper alloys and monitoring the changes that occurred with different heat treatment times. That all struck me as being quite powerful because it meant that we could tune mechanical properties. Up until that point, I hadn't fully appreciated that that was possible.
What's a little more unfortunate is that I've also since learned that if we want to achieve a particular characteristic, high strength for example, we often have to do so at the expense of another, usually the ductility. I guess that's why material scientists all over the world continue to look for new compositions, new alloy systems, even novel heat treatments that offer mechanical performance improvements that, perhaps, haven't yet been realized. My involvement in this industry is driven simply by my interest in these things, which is why I feel extremely lucky to be leading a company like Plastometrex.
DG: Tell us a bit about the company. You're the CEO there. As I mentioned earlier, you're located in Cambridge, UK. Tell us about the company, its history and about the products and things of that sort.
JD: Plastometrex is a company that develops novel mechanical testing systems that are powered by advanced software tools. By advanced, what I really mean is state of the art modeling methods, things like finite-element analysis, optimization algorithms and also, forgive the buzz words but, machine learning tools, as well. These are needed because our machines measure stress strain curves and metal strength parameters from quick and simple indentation tests.
There is some justification to say that people have been indenting materials for centuries and, of course, that is true. But people have been doing this simply to measure hardness numbers, predominantly, at least. We might argue that anybody that understands a little bit about hardness testing probably also understands that hardness numbers are not fundamental material properties. They would understand that a material's hardness number actually changes if you change the shape of the indenter that you use or if you change the load that you apply.
Hardness numbers can only really be used in a semiquantitative way to rank materials. They can't be used in a design calculation or in a finite-element analysis. So, to use them as proxies for strength, which is often done, can, in fact, be potentially dangerous. I would go on to say that, unfortunately, hardness numbers are often accorded a much higher significance than they really deserve. My own view is that it is much better to have access to fundamental strength characteristics which is why we've been spending our time developing these new machines and their associated software packages.
So, to wrap up the question, the technique is called indentation plastometry and it was developed over a 10 – 12 year period of research, led mostly by Professor Bill Clyne and his research group in Cambridge. On the back of that, we established Plastometrex in late 2018 to commercialize the technology.
DG: You're saying the company, Plastometrex, was established in 2018. So, you're about 3 years into this. Are you fairly successful so far? I mean, are you happy with the progress?
JD: I would say that we're reasonably happy with our progress so far. Of course, like a lot of companies, we're just coming out of this rather difficult period because of Covid. What that means, for a company like ours, which I guess you could still class as a start-up, is that it's just much harder to sell equipment.
What we're finding right now is that lots of companies rationalized their organizations in various different ways. One of the first things that companies seem to have done, which is quite understandable, is put restrictions on their CapEx spending. That's something that we, like most companies, have to deal with at the moment.
But, notwithstanding that, I would say we still make good progress with monies to secure quite substantial amounts of investment. One of our leading investors is Element Materials Technology. They're one of the world's leading providers of testing inspection certification services. We're still employing more people. At this stage, we're launching new initiatives and we are selling machines, despite the current climate. Our trajectory looks quite good right now.
DG: Where are you selling, primarily? Is it mostly Europe?
JD: It's mostly Europe, at the moment. We have sold one of our machines, actually, to Worcester Polytechnique Institute in North America. We're actually having conversations right now, I won't disclose them, with other North American universities who have expressed an interest in technologies like ours.
DG: Good. It's good to see a young company doing well even in the midst of Covid, so congratulations on that.
Broadly speaking, your company is dealing with materials characterization testing. The equipment you produce: what properties is it, in fact, intended to characterize? You've already hit on this a little bit- stress, strain, etc. Maybe briefly explain each of those properties for those who might not know what the difference of those things are. A quick “materials 101.”
JD: The very quick answer to your question, Doug, is that we are measuring plasticity characteristics or strength characteristics. They're often best captured, or best represented, in the form of the stress strain curve.
Now, stress strain curve of material is really quite important since from it you can deduce important features like the stiffness of a material. But then there are other features, such as those I've described that relate to the plasticity characteristics. These are things, like the yield stress of the material, which is the stress at which the material starts to plastically deform or, i.e., permanently change its shape.
You can also view the hardening behavior as the material continues to strain, which is often quite important. And, you can also extract from the stress strain curves things, like an ultimate tensile strength or a fracture strength, and these things can be used in things like design calculations.
From the stress strain curve you can also extract a ductility value, which is a nominal strength fracture for those people in the know. But, as with hardness numbers, the ductility value is also not a fundamental material property and this is often not understood. The ductility value actually changes depending on the test geometry that you use. That's an important thing to understand because people often use the ductility in things like engineering critical assessments not fully understanding that that value can be different depending on the test that you did.
I think the important message here is indentation plastometry can be used to measure things like the yield stress, to measure the uniform elongation strength, to measure the ultimate tensile strength of the material. But, our technique can also be used, if you want to, to calculate things like the Vickers and the Brinell hardness numbers, as well. But, the limitations around hardness numbers that I've already outlined still apply.
DG: Your product is basically offering a new way of doing some of these tests. Basically, it almost looks like just a hardness test because you're doing the indentation, but you're getting a heck of a lot more out of it. Maybe, again, just 101, how have these tests been done in the past and what is the method that you've been developing over the past 3 years? How does that differ and what is the benefit?
JD: The current gold standard for mechanical testing is the uniaxial tensile test. To us, at least, that is another mechanical test that hasn't fundamentally changed for almost a century, actually. In principal, it is a rather simple test where you take a test specimen in the form of a testing coupon and you stretch it (or strain it, to use the proper term), and you do that until it breaks. If you monitor the forces in the displacements during the test, it's very easy to calculate the stresses and strains within the sample. But, there are a number of problems with this type of testing machine.
The first is that you need to have access to quite a lot of the material that you want to test because the test specimens are usually quite large, often in the centimeter dimension range. That also means that the material that you want to test needs to be machinable, and not all materials are; I'm referring mostly to metals here. In fact, some are actually quite difficult to machine so that this process of machining test coupons can be quite a cumbersome one. Often quite time consuming, too, especially if you need to outsource these procedures.
The test itself also requires access to a large, often very expensive, universal test machine, and, in addition, a suitably trained technician, as well. There can be further problems with things like specimen gripping, alignment of the specimen, machine compliance, and other things like that.
Whereas, and of course I'm biased, a machine like the indentation plastometer, really combines the very best attributes of hardness testing, which is speed, ease and simplicity of testing, with the very best attributes of tensile testing, which is acquisition and access to forced stress strain curves.
I would add to that, as well, that with a machine like ours, you can test real components and you can map spacial variations in properties across surfaces, such as those, for example, that might exist across a weld. Again, in summary, we think you get the best of both worlds with our machine and, in some cases, even things that are better than other machines.
DG: You may have already stated this a little bit, but briefly: indentation plastometry is basically taking an indentation to be able to test, not just hardness or not even necessarily hardness, but the deformation or the strain of material. Do you have to know the microstructure of the material when you're doing these tests?
JD: That's a good question. In principle, no. If we were to dig deep into the mechanics of what's going on within our system and our software package, you'd come to recognize that it's, from a mathematical point of view at least, insensitive to microsctructural features. There is a numerical method underlying this – a finite-element analysis – therefore, treating this as a continuum system doesn't take account explicitly of the microstructure.
When you're doing the test, it's actually helpful to know something about the microstructure simply because our technology is all about extracting bulk mechanical behavior engineering properties. Therefore, when we do our indentation test, it is important that we are indenting a representative volume of the material.
It is important that we are capturing all of the microstructural features that give rise to the behavior you would measure in a microscopic stress strain test. Otherwise, you can't pull out those bulk, core engineering properties, and therefore, the scale on which you do the indent is important. Your indenter has to be large relative to the scale of the microstructure. So, it's only at that level that you need to understand or know anything about the microstructure.
DG: This test is a nondestructive test, right? You said you can actually test live materials, correct?
JD: Yes.
DG: You don't have to destroy them, you don't have to machine them, you don't have to make them into something you can rip apart, right?
JD: Right.
DG: Is there a limitation on the size of the product that you can test? Do you have to put this thing into a machine to clamp it down to do the indentation?
JD: Yes. There are some limitations. I'll come back to those in a second. I just want to address the first point. It wasn't a question, but you actually referenced it, so I'm going to pick up on it, and it's about whether this test is nondestructive or not.
It's an interesting question. I think, really, it's a matter of perspective, or sometimes, a matter of even industry. We don't destroy test samples in the same way you do during a normal tensile test. But, we do create small indents in the surface of the specimen. Whether that can be regarded as destructive is really open to interpretation. Our colleagues in the aerospace industry probably would be comfortable testing a turbine blade and then putting it back into service even if the indent is relatively small. So, on that basis, they might consider the test to be a destructive one. But, for many other applications, we, and others actually, would regard our test as a nondestructive one and, indeed, that is often how we pitch it.
Then, to the second question which is about limitations on size. . .
DG: Yes, size, geometry, shape, or anything of that sort.
JD: There are no restrictions on shape, per se. It's important that the specimen has two parallel sides. When you put in on the plinth, under which when you do the testing, when you come down normal to that surface with the indenter, you want them to be as flat as possible. You can accommodate small inclines up to 2-3 degrees, but ideally they would be parallel. So, that's one constraint.
In terms of total size, if you look at a bench top machine, (and anybody visiting our website would be able to see it), it's got sort of like a window, a cavity, where you can put your specimens into which has got a width of about 20 cm, height of about 7 cm and a depth which is also probably about 20 cm, as well. That is what is governing/dictating the maximum size of sample you can put in there, at the moment.
In terms of the other direction, how small can you go, we advised people not to indent anything that has lateral dimensions less than about 5 x 5 mm and that is because if you start to indent close to edges, you can get edge effects and therefore in our software package, behind the scenes, the modeling assumptions that we impose start to break down.
In addition to that, in terms of the sample thickness, we typically impose a minimum height of about 2 mm. Then again, that is because, in our underlying software package, the modeling assumptions assume that what you're indenting is essentially semi infinite in size and if you indent thin samples, that assumption breaks down too. That's what is driving those constraints on sample size.
DG: And, being able to run a test on a spherical object is not a problem as long as you can get it flat, I mean, like pipe tube and that type of stuff?
JD: Pipes are interesting, actually. One of the things we're working on right now as a company is an in-field testing kit, or portable detection plastometer. Our immediate focus is on the pipeline materials. In fact, you might know this, there is some new legislation in North America called the Gas Mega Rule which is now mandating that pipeline operators inspect their pipes, I think it's probably every one mile into this. One of the tests that they need to do is a strength test.
There's a big opportunity out there, potentially, for the testing of pipe materials. A technology like ours is something that could support and enable that. But then, coming back to your question about indenting a surface that is curved, which is what this really relates to. And that is simply, again, a matter of scale. If it's got extremely high curvature and you come down with an indenter such that the curvature is large with respect to indenter size, then you can now have problems. If the curvature is small relative to the scale of the indent, then it's okay; i.e., if you come down and it still looks like a flat surface, it's the indenter because of the differences in scale, then you're okay.
DG: And, I think you said the 2-3 degree the tolerance which would come into play there.
JD: Indeed.
DG: Most anybody that's going to buy this equipment is going to say, “OK, what's in it for me? Why should I buy this thing as opposed to going the normal route, or things of that sort?” Talk to us a little bit about the overall expense, overall experience with your equipment. Why would it be something that people would pick up?
JD: From an experience point of view, I think one of our key objectives while developing the technology and, indeed, the supporting software, has been to ensure that the experience of using the system is a smooth one. We've attempted to minimize the level of interaction to these it needs to have with the machine and the software and also to try to maximize the degree of automation. I think that we've been able to strike the right balance. I think the workflow is simple and intuitive. And, importantly, we present the results in a format that the users would recognize if they've previously done conventional mechanical testing.
I think one of the key attributes, if you like, one of the key salable attributes of our system, is that you can measure full stress strength strain curves in just a few minutes, 2 – 3 minutes, so almost in real time. When you're doing this thing in real time, it's potentially transformative for lots of businesses in lots of different ways because it unlocks that materials testing bottleneck that lots of companies are already familiar with. I don't like the term, but the value proposition, if you like, is speed of testing, ease of testing and simplicity of testing. That's where you're going to derive the most value from a machine like ours.
DG: Do you have any examples of where somebody has used this? You don't need to mention names, of course, I'm not asking for company names, but maybe an industry where somebody's been able to kind of move their testing into real time testing? And if you don't, that's also okay.
JD: I can give you a couple of examples which we can disclose. We've got some people using our machine for high thru port testing and combinatorial analysis with things like additively manufactured metals. That is basically where companies that are using additively manufactured systems are very keen to understand how changes in process parameters and changes in alloy composition and changes in powder type and powder size distribution, what effect that has on the mechanical properties.
If you want to do this using conventional systems, you've got to print tensile specimens or other types of bonds, and they you've got to print them and test them. This is quite cumbersome. Whereas, with our machine, you can just print a small cube or small disc or something like that, and then you can immediately indent it and get stress strength curves. You can do, essentially, rapid design exploration and rapid process optimization.
This is not just specific to end processes. Wherever you've got all the types of thermomechanical processes taking place to develop or design the metals and you need to characterize the corresponding strength characteristics and you want to do it quickly, then you need a machine like ours.
DG: They wouldn't even need to print the actual part; they'd print a suitably large enough cube, test it, and then you'll know.
JD: Absolutely. And that cube, as I've described, could be quite small, it might just be 1 cm cubed in volume and that would be sufficient. So, actually, the cost of doing this test comes down, as well, because you're not printing lots of material.
We're working with additive manufactured companies right now that are validating the technology. We're having some of these companies print material for us and it's extremely expensive unfortunately and it's just a process that we have to go through at the moment to prove out the technology. They can see the benefit themselves of being able to rapidly characterize the strength of their materials.
DG: Do you want to address, at all, as far as overall lifetime expense investment in a product like yours as opposed to other testing methods? We talked about workflow, ease of use, ease of reporting and things of that sort. Any comments on lifetime costs of use?
JD: Yes, I can say a few things. First off, our machines typically retail at prices which are comparable to a low end universal mechanical test machine, mid-range for hardness test machines, so sort of right in the middle there. Although, as I've said before, I think our machine benefits from having the best attributes involved. It is a robust machine, it's just doing indentation tests, so the longevity and the robustness is good and strong.
There are very few aftermarket parts that you might, conceivably, want to buy to bolt on. You don't need suitably trained technicians either with backgrounds in mechanical testing or material science; you can press the button and run it. The lifetime costs, we think, are substantially better than a conventional tensile test machine. If people want to talk a bit more about the commercial aspect of these machines, they, by all means, can get in touch.
It might be worth mentioning, it's not necessary to buy our machines. We do have leasing agreements specifically because of these CapEx restrictions that we're seeing out there in market right now, but also because of a certainty you can anyway. If these go on to operational expenses, then there are certain tax advantages, as well, to doing that.
DG: Types of companies that would find this to be really helpful. In other words, are you seeing that a certain industry or a certain type of company are interested in your product, or an industry that should be that is not yet?
JD: A good question. We've been extremely surprised, actually, at the level of traction we've been able to generate so far. We officially launched our machine in November of last year, so we're only 4 or 5 months since the launch. We're already talking to probably 50 or 60 companies right now, including some major, major tier 1 companies across the world.
I think one of the great things about materials testing is that it is not set or industry specific. Almost all industries need access to the strength of their materials in order to design new products, for example, or to ensure that the materials or products that they produce are safe to operate and fit for purpose. At the moment, we're getting a lot of interest from metal producing companies, processing companies from the additive manufacturing community which, traditionally, have been quite difficult to measure the strength of their materials, from aerospace companies to automotive companies to companies engaged in things like failure analysis and also from universities and research institutes, too.
We're really seeing an interest from a very broad range of organizations and I think that is reflective of what I said in the beginning of this question which is that materials testing is not sector or industry specific, it's kind of ubiquitous of all those industries.
DG: What are you most excited about with this company? You're, what, 6 months into it maybe as far as actual product out there? What puts a smile on your face?
JD: That's a good question. There are a couple of things that put a smile on my face. One, I really enjoy working with the people that I've got on my team, who are as enthusiastic and as motivated as me to see this company do well. And, I also really enjoy talking to the wide range of customers, because what I see when we talk, is them saying, “Gosh, if we would have known about this 5 years ago, we'd be already using it.” or they say, “This is fantastic. This is exactly what we've been looking for and it can solve this problem and that problem.” Then, they start coming to me and saying, “Can you also change something up so that we can do this or we can do that?”
So, there's always new potential opportunities arising because of it. That really excites me, because what it points to is additional opportunities for plastometry.
DG: What do you worry about? What keeps you up at night?
JD: I guess, the immediate concern right now is what the recovery post Covid looks like, especially in certain industries like aerospace which, in ordinary times, would have been an ideal market for a technology like ours. That's the type of thing that makes me worry. So, we're keeping a very close eye on what the recovery looks like, not just here in the UK, but also abroad.
The other thing that, I wouldn't so much say worries me, but it is something that we're thinking very hard about, is the standardization methodology, as well. If you want to get a technology like ours used broadly across all industries, then one thing that crops up a lot is, Is it certified? Is there a testing standard? At the moment, there isn't.
We are compliant with a couple of testing standards around instrumented indentation testing. We're also working, right now, with the National Physical Laboratory in the UK, which is, I guess, our equivalent of your NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology). They are working with us, right now, as a precursor to supporting our efforts towards standardizing our test technology. It's a 3 – 5 year program, but I think if we can tread that long path properly and get the test methodology certified, then, again, additional opportunities will open to us in those more conservative industries.
DG: Do you have a presence in North America, or do you have a way of dealing with customers in North America?
JD: We have no formal way of doing this, and at the moment, it's manageable because we're not getting hundreds of requests every day. We are shipping machines to North America. We are managing it internally by ourselves, at the moment. One of the things that we do have in our back pocket, so to speak, is our relationship with Element, one of our leading investors. We have a huge North American presence and they can certainly support us where needed, if, for example, we need to set up a base in North America or engage with distributors in North America or something like that.
DG: We talked before we turned the recording button on about how to properly pronounce your company; it's not plastometrics, it's Plastometrex. Where would people go if they want to find out more? If you're comfortable, James, you can give out whatever personal type of information, if you want your cellphone out there or email or whatever, feel free to do that, as well as your website.
JD: The first place we encourage people to visit is our website, and that is www.plastometrex.com and there is information there about our machine, about its capabilities, there are some FAQs, there are lots of technical articles sort of describing the underlying science, and there are research publications. It's a really good source of information for people.
One of the other places I point people to is our LinkedIn channel. We have a very active presence on LinkedIn where we're constantly pushing our material- some technical, some promotional, some lighthearted, some serious. It's a really good place to engage with us. We've got lots of educational content going out, as well. And, of course, people can reach out to me directly at my LinkedIn by searching for James Dean Plastometrex. They are the three best ways, I would say.
Doug Glenn
Publisher Heat TreatToday
To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio and look in the list of Heat Treat Radio episodes listed.
Heat TreatToday publisher Doug Glenn discusses hot isostatic pressing with Cliff Orcutt of American Isostatic Presses, Inc. Learn about the revolution that is occurring in the heat treat industry and how it is being used across various manufacturing industries
Below, you can either listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or you can read an edited transcript.
The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.
Doug Glenn (DG): First off, Cliff, I want to just welcome you to Heat Treat Radio. Welcome!
Cliff Orcutt (CO): Thank you.
DG: If you don't mind, let's give our listeners just a brief background about you.
CO: It's been 43 quick years in the industry. I, actually, did start as a child. My father was one of the original people at Battelle where it was patented in the '50s, so, I grew up under that. Right out of school, I went to work for his company, after he and another gentleman left Battelle, Mike Conaway, and they formed Conaway Pressure Systems. By the time I was 20, I had already installed 10 HIP units around the world and helped design and build the Mini Hipper.
I was involved in 1978 in moving the world's largest HIP unit from Battelle to Crucible Steel in Pittsburgh, which is now ATI. Also, in 1979/80, we installed the very large system for Babcock and Wilcox at the Naval Nuclear Fuel Division in Lynchburg, VA. Both of those units, 40 years later, are still running.
I'm also past president of the Advanced Materials Powder Association, part of MPIF, and I was also a director of their Isostatic Pressing Association. I am currently the chairman of the International HIP Committee. We put on the triennial HIP conference every 3 years.
DG: Is that part of APMI?
CO: It's actually its own group. It was formed by all of the people in HIP around the world, in Europe and Japan and the United States back in, maybe, 1983 or so.
DG: What's the name of the organization?
CO: It's called the International HIP Committee. It's kind of a loose organization which the only thing that we do is put on this conference and we bring in speakers from around the world and promote HIP technology, basically. Our last one was in Sydney, Australia in 2017. We were supposed to have one in October 2020 and now it's pushed until September of 2021.
DG: Where will that be?
CO: It's going to be in Columbus, Ohio because that was the original founding city. Every other conference, we move to the United States, Europe or Japan. So, it's coming back to the US. I'm in charge of it. We have some other good people on the board, including Mike Conaway, who was one of the original Battelle people. Victor Samarov is on the board helping us with the meeting, programming and so forth. People can visit www.hip2020.org to see information on that.
DG: I got you a little distracted on that. Keep going with your background.
CO: Personally, in these 43 years, I've installed over 200 units, hands on. I've flown about 5 million miles, I've been to 38 countries; you name it, I've been there, good ones and bad ones. In my early years, when my father started this company, they pulled about 6 people out of Battelle and they were, basically, my teachers. So, instead of going to educational school, I went to HIP school. We had some of the top people: Roger Pinney, Hugh Hanes, Don Woesner, Gary Felton and another gentleman, Bob Tavnner, all came out of there.
In 1979, my father passed away, and his company then sold to ASEA who then became ABB who then became ABB Flow and then they became Quintus now. That's how they have a location in Columbus, as well.
A couple of people, including Bob Tavnner, left and formed International Pressure Service. That was in 1983. They hired me as operations manager, and we grew to be a force to be reckoned with and the Japanese then bought us. At that time, Rajendra Persaud, or Reggie we call him, left and formed AIP (American Isostatic Presses) and I said, “Hey, Reggie, let's have a two person company again rather than two one-person companies.” That was 1992 and so, 28 years later, now we're a force to be reckoned with again.
DG: Tell us a little about AIP.
CO: American Isostatic Presses, when the Japanese bought us, we had a lot of technology and a lot of good people. Then they hired a new CEO and he decided he didn't want to continue building HIP units, he wanted to do something else. So, Reggie formed AIP and I joined him and we pulled 5 other people back from ITS. We sold our first big job in 1994 to Horus in Singapore, a multimillion dollar job, and took off from there and haven't looked back. We started on a shoestring, no venture capitalists, no dollars, and now we have 4 buildings and locations around the globe.
"We're just a high tech blacksmith, that's all it is. Instead of hitting something with a hammer, we're using gas pressure to squeeze on it."
DG: How many units do you think you guys have installed since 1994?
CO: As AIP, around 150. It's snowballing. In the last 5 years, we've sold 5 big units. Up until that time we were mainly mid and small. We had orders for some big ones but, unfortunately, we couldn't get export licenses for them. The technology that grew out of Battelle was based on nuclear fuel rods for the submarines. Admiral Rickover wanted to extend the life of the sub, so it was protected for quite some time. And then they also had missile nose cone technologies it was used for and that's still what they're protecting it for is missile nose cones.
We had some orders in the late '90s early 2000 through China for large equipment and we were denied. Then we were denied in India, so we kind of just got stuck with the smaller to mid-size units. Here recently, it's starting to expand. Things are loosening up a little bit.
DG: AIP today is selling not only in North America, obviously, but you're pretty much selling around the world, anywhere where it is legal to sell, you'll do it.
CO: Yes, if we can get an export license, we will put it in. Some of the rules have relaxed a little bit, and, with some countries, we're more friendly with them now.
DG: I think a lot of our listeners are probably not going to be as familiar with HIPing, hot isostatic pressing, as other more common “heat treat operations” like carburizing, hardening, annealing and that type of thing. Take us back, class 101: What is HIPing?
CO: We're just a high tech blacksmith, that's all it is. Instead of hitting something with a hammer, we're using gas pressure to squeeze on it. We heat it up hot, we put pressure on it, and we're basically densifying it, making it more dense, and getting rid of imperfections in the metal.
A lot of what's done is castings. When you have a casting, the metal is hot, so it's expanded. When it cools, it cools from the outside in, so it freezes on the outside first and then the center starts to shrink. It creates internal porosity. Most of that porosity is thermal shrinking which is a void. So, you put it back in our heat treatment, apply pressure to it and you get rid of the voids that are left. You make the casting dense and better grain structure and more homogenous. It increases fatigue in property strength. That's the number one use of it right now.
Second is probably powder metallurgy where you take powder metals and you can blend powders and you can start with different grain sizes and different materials. You put them in a container because the gas would go through the container if you didn't have something around it. So, you squeeze on the container and it densifies whatever is inside of it and you make a solid part. For example, a lot of powder metallurgy billets which are then used for extruding into other products or rolls and different things. We do a lot of pump bodies and valves for deep sea work, extruder barrels, you can bond things; there are a whole lot of applications.
DG: The two things I understand with HIPing are high temperature and high pressure. Give us a sense of high temperature. What does that mean? Is it hotter than a typical heat treat operation? And. how about the pressures? Give us a sense of what the pressures are looking like.
CO: A lot of people are familiar with sintering. That's where you just take the metal up, you sinter it and the grains merge together by melding and attractive forces. What we're doing is: we're not taking it up to those high temperatures to where the part actually is molten or melting, we're taking them up below that and applying pressure. Because of the pressure, we're basically pressurize sintering; we're adding force to make it sinter faster or better or at lower temperatures.
Usually, it's about 150 C degree less than sintering temperature. Again, it depends on the process of what we're trying to do with it. Typically, most parts are done around 15,000, some parts 30,000. Here, at AIP, we actually have test units up to 60,000 PSI and we've actually built 100,000 PSI HIP units. You're above the yield strength of some of the metals you're using. Most of the majority, again, in like castings, titaniums around 970, steels around 1225, but we go up to 2200 C for some things, even higher for like half-in carbide with people pushing it to 2300. It's pretty hot, a lot of pressure. Unfortunately, high temperature and high pressure costs money. You want to use the lowest pressure and the lowest temperature you can get by with, but sometimes you can't.
DG: It's harder, I would imagine. The way I've always heard it said is that the hotter it is, the more difficult it is to keep, let's say, that cylinder container that you're talking about. If it becomes hotter, it's harder to keep it together. I would guess you're right, when you've got higher temperatures, things tend to blow apart easier?
CO: Not so much. The temperature is contained in the middle of the pressure vessel, so you've got plenty of insulation around it and you keep your container cool. The goal there, in a HIP unit, because it's the expensive piece of item, you want maximize your work zone, that's where you have to have good engineering to make sure you do keep the container cool.
DG: Are most of those units water cooled jackets, or are they cold wall?
CO: They're almost all hot wall, but some of them are cooled internally and some of them are cooled externally. You still have loss to the metal, whether it's internal or external cooled, but internal gives you faster cooling than the external.
The big advantage of HIPing is, like with some materials like titanium, you can eliminate a lot of machining. Making chip that you can't really reuse real easy makes a lot of economic sense. Titanium is a very high melting temperature, so you can't take those chips and melt them cheaply. Aluminum, you can. A lot of aluminum, people can't afford to HIP it because you can just recast it.
HIP is an expense process. The equipment is expense. It uses argon gas. Swinging a hammer is cheap, but using gas pressure, it's so compressible, that you have to put a lot in. You can reclaim some, but the cost is still high. You're talking medical, aerospace and military, basically. Forty years ago, I thought every car would have HIP pistons. It's just not going to happen. They can't afford it. I do see Edelbrock and Trickflow both have HIPed aluminum race heads, though. If you get into where you have the economy of doing something like that, you can apply it. You're definitely going to get a better product, it's just price versus performance.
Watch an "oldie but goodie" on what HIP is.
DG: As far as why people want to do the HIPing, I guess, primarily, it's an elimination of, let's say, defects or inclusions or whatever, either cast parts or powder metal parts, you're increasing fatigue strength, and things of that sort.
Are there any other major reasons why people want to HIP?
CO: Well, there are some things you can't make other ways. In other words, it's like water and oil, you can't mix them very well and some metals you can't melt them and just make a molten bucket and pour it. In HIP, since you're starting with powders that are solid, you can blend things like graphite powder and steel. You couldn't blend them very well in a molten state, but in here, you can. And, you can squeeze it to solid, you can get interlocking and bonding and diffusion bonding materials that you couldn't otherwise. So, you can make things you couldn't make any other way.
Also, you can eliminate machining. For instance, you're making a titanium fitting that has a lot of holes on the inside, it might even be curved and really hard to drill, but you can lay it up and do powder metallurgy around it and make shapes that you couldn't make otherwise. A lot of parts are pressed and sintered for years, for instance, for transmissions. Something like that is real easy because it's a small disc and it's not very long. But, if you're trying to make a real long part that is a strange shape, you can't just press and sinter it. You can do it from HIPing. You can do big shapes that you couldn't get enough force on or you can't fit into a press dye. You can do big shapes that you couldn't get enough force on or you can't fit into a press dye. It opens up a lot of options. A missile nose cone, for instance. There is just almost no way to press and sinter a cone, but with HIPing you can make that shape and you can make it very uniform. There's really no other way to do it.
DG: I think that is one of the benefits of HIPing, from what I understand, it is absolutely equal pressure on all parts when you increase the pressure. It's not like you're only pushing on one part, like with a forge press, or something like that – equal pressure all round.
CO: Yes. And it gives you uniform density throughout the part, which is very difficult.
DG: HIPing is primarily used on castings, powder metal and things of that sort, helps us get a very clean part, if you will, to eliminate inclusions, and minimize the porosity.
You may have mentioned this before, but the actual history of HIPing. It started at Battelle?
CO: It started at Battelle [Memorial Institute], I think in '55 or '56. Again, for the nuclear fuel rods for cladding of the fuel rod. Four people were involved in the patent, two of them, Ed Hodge and Stan Paprocki, "the two others on the patent were Henry Saller and Russell Dayton" I worked for both of them over my years. It grew out of Battelle and then in 1975 is when my father and Mike Conaway left and formed Conaway Pressure Systems. That was kind of like the beginning of the commercialization of it. There were some other companies, like Autoclave Engineers, that were building high pressure equipment, but they weren't really offering packaged HIP units. Conaway Pressure, CPSI we called it, was really the origination of commercial HIPs as we know it.
DG: You hit on this a little bit, but I want to make sure that we're clear on it. You mentioned the industries that are using it, but let's just review that real quickly, and maybe if you can give any example of parts. You said, they've got to be higher value parts because the process is expensive, so we're looking at aerospace, medical and that type of thing. What primarily, at least in those two industries, and other industries if you want to list, are the parts being run?
We’re seeing a lot of application now in ceramics. We see pump plungers and ceramic bearings. Here, at AIP, we do a lot of military work for armor, boron carbides, spinell (21:03), things that are really hard, ceramics. . . You want them perfect because if they have a defect in it, that’s a starting point for a crack. A lot of brakes for jets and fighter jets.
CO: A lot of extruder barrels. What happens is you can use a solid steel chunk of metal for the barrel portion but then you can HIP or diffusion-bond powders on the inside of that barrel that might be very expensive. If you're doing something like a crane or something where the teeth are outside, you can weld on. A lot of times they'll weld on hard brittle materials that help you dig things with a digger. But on an extruder barrel, it's on the inside, it's internal; it's very hard to coat down on the inside. So, we can actually bond those powders to the inside of extruder barrels.
Another big application is sputtering targets. I don't know if you're familiar with sputtering targets, but they're basically sacrificial material that you plate onto other materials. The target is just something that is being hit with an electron beam inside a vacuum furnace. It creates a vapor and by charging the different particles you can attract them and plate things out. All of your mirrored windows, all of your hard drives, all of your CDs and DVDs, when you see that mirrored finish on there, that is a sputtered coating and those coatings come from these things we call targets. What happens is, if say, you're doing a chromium target, at the end, if you try to molten cast it, if you had a bath or a melt of chromium, it would get oxides in it and be terrible. But, you can make very pure powders. That's one of the good things about HIPing is they can make very pure powders by blowing argon through a stream and it makes nice pure powder. Then, we can put it in and squeeze it into a solid billet and make a target which then can be evaporated in the vacuum chamber for coating.
We're seeing a lot of application now in ceramics. We see pump plungers and ceramic bearings. Here, at AIP, we do a lot of military work for armor, boron carbides, spinell (21:03), things that are really hard, ceramics. . . You want them perfect because if they have a defect in it, that's a starting point for a crack. A lot of brakes for jets and fighter jets.
We have a process inside the HIP that we call carbon-carbon impregnation. We take pressure and we push the carbon into the 3D woven graphite fibers and make brakes and nose cones. Other materials like beryllium, it's very hard to make beryllium and machine it because it's kind of dangerous, and so forth. Again, they take powders and the HIP the beryllium to make things like space mirrors and other jet parts.
Now, we've got into more things like teeth and braces are being done with ceramics- new transparent braces made out of aluminum and different materials, zirconia caps for your teeth. Again, if you don't HIP them and they've got a defect in it, it will be like a plate when you drop it. But, if you get rid of that defect, now you've got something harder than steel. On the other end we're doing jewelry such as gold and platinum rings. The benefit there is you don't have porosity. If you have porosity, it's like trying to sand a sponge and you can never find a nice perfect surface. But if you've got rid of that and the sponge is now hard, then you can polish it and you're not taking off any material.
It hasn't really happened too much, but we're seeing rumblings on phone cases. A lot of those have been metal in the past, but now they want to do the magnetic charging and it doesn't work real well.
DG: It's got to be glass of some sort, right?
CO: Yes. We're competing with Gorilla Glass. Some companies are looking at transferring that to zirconia. The iPhone watch, or iWatch, they were making it in zirconia, and that's one of the applications and things like that. Ceramic rings, ceramic knives, ceramic scissors – they're all being HIPed.
On the diffusion front, like the vacuum plates for the fusion reactor, like ITER, they can bond copper to tungsten and different things. You couldn't really weld them, because if you try to weld tungsten, it gets real brittle and cracks, but you can diffusion bond materials and you can do things you couldn't do otherwise.
DG: Those are great examples, and I think that gives folks enough. Are there any other examples that jump to your mind that you think people ought to know about, or is that it?
CO: The big one right now is 3-D printing. There is a lot of interest in 3-D body parts, titanium, stents, spines, implants for teeth and screws. Just about anything you can put in 3-D, they're trying to print. The problem with 3-D is, it's not perfect yet. Maybe in 10 years it will be perfect, but they're making imperfect parts when they print them. If you put them in the HIP and squeeze on it, not you've got a pretty much perfect dense part that's bonded better, stronger, improved properties.
It also allows you to print faster, so maybe you'll want to print an imperfect part, but you can just print twice as fast, so you increase the range between the particle and speed up your process. Again, price versus performance. You look at what the benefits of the two ways are.
DG: I've got a question. In heat treating, a lot of times after heating, you have to worry about dimensional change of the part, right? So, I'm thinking to myself, you've got a cast part with some innate porosity and you put it in a HIPing unit. Do you have to compensate, or do you have to be careful about dimensional change, most notably, I would think, with pressure shrinkage of the part?
CO: Very little because it's isostatic and we're talking about micro macro small porosity. If you had a 1 inch hole in the center and you were squeezing that out, you might give it up, but microscopic particle size is really not that much. Now, in the powder metallurgy, we say it's isostatic but then you do have some of the stresses in the container that you put around it. You might see some distortion at the corners where you welded a container, and so forth. But, there's good software out there, there's good programming and things and a lot of empirical data. People can pretty much design to shape within a couple millimeters.
DG: You mentioned this earlier, but the gas that's used is predominantly argon, because it's a heavy gas?
CO: The reason we use argon is the furnaces we use can't run in air or oxygen. We have a choice of nitrogen or argon, the two commercial grade gases. Nitrogen also embrittles materials like molybdenum. It tears up our furnaces, so argon is the preferred choice. Also, it has poor thermal conductivity which is good for the insulating portion of the HIP unit and when you get it dense enough then it does conduct good enough that it works for the part. It's the all around cleanest, best gas but it's an inexpensive gas. We do use nitrogen on some things. A lot of ceramics like silicon nitride we'll use nitrogen, for different reasons.
One of the biggest issues right now is we see a lot of interest in oxide ceramics. I've got many customers that want us to build a real high temperature oxygen furnace and we're real close to issuing that. What it will allow is to actually sinter in the HIP unit at high temperatures under partial oxygen which hasn't been done yet.
DG: Let's change gears just a little bit. You actually have two sister companies. I want to ask you two questions and you can incorporate information about those sister companies with this: One, why would a company want to outsource a HIPing process? And, two, on the flip side of that, why would a company want to purchase their own HIPing equipment and do it in-house? Maybe you can address both of those, because you've got experience on both sides, based on your sister companies.
CO: The outsourcing is really easy. If you've only got one part to HIP, you're not going to buy a HIPing unit. It's quantity versus can you support the operation of the HIP unit. And, you've got to do it profitably. You've got to do everything profitably or you're not going to do anything. You've got to look at the capital equipment cost and the space. Maybe you don't have space in your building or you don't want to build a new building, or, maybe you just don't have the people that have the knowledge in HIPing and you don't want to hire and train a maintenance crew, and so forth. Even some big companies like Pratt &Whitney and Wyam-Gordon both owned massive HIP units at one time and they decided it was cheaper to sell the HIP unit to Bodycote and then outsource it.
Sometimes economics may play in there, but sometimes maybe you want to have in-house sourcing. Maybe your part is so heavy, you can't afford to ship it. Then, you look at that and say you might want to have your own HIP for that reason, or you've got so many parts, you just can't afford to box them all, ship them out and bring them back. So, there are reasons why you'd want to own your own HIP unit.
DG: You've got sister companies that do the service, right? AIP, American Isostatic Presses, the company that you're with specifically, they build the units. But you've got sister company that actually does the service. Tell us about them a little bit.
CO: When we started out, we were just going to build HIP units and we were selling to a lot of the toll companies and we still do. But, around 2004, after the economic downturn of 2001, we decided we would get into building our own pressure vessels. We hired an engineer, Dan Taylor from Hydropack, and started building pressure vessels because we thought we could do it better. Then we were looking at toll. A lot of people would come to use and say they were not happy with turnaround or other things and they asked if we could help them toll HIP? We kind of got drug into it. We didn't, again, want to step on our customer's toes, so we came out with a different name and sort of hid behind that a little bit and didn't really even market it for a long time. But then again we kept getting dragged in, so we opened another plant and now, this last year, we opened another one. I've never seen a toll HIP company go out of business yet or lose money. Equipment building is up and down, you're riding the waves. It helped us flatten the curve a little bit. It flattened out the cash flow curve and it helped us a lot. Our competitors weren't doing it. They still aren't really doing it like we're doing it. The original name was Isostatic Pressing Services (IPS), then when we did our plant in Oregon, we called it ITS, Isostatic Toll Services. The family wanted to have different names and different people involved and there are different investors. It's AIP, basically, but there are other family members in the Persaud family. In Spain, the big one we opened last year, it kept the ITS name, but there are five players in that one, so we're one of the players.
DG: So, the sister companies have Toll Services, I know one in Oregon. And one in Ohio?
CO: The other is in Mississippi and then one in Spain. The Ohio one is under the AIP name. Basically, what we do in Ohio is we do more research. We, again, are expanding here in Columbus. We are getting ready to build again and we'll start heading a little more into the production toll. We've got a couple customers that are, again, pulling us that way. But, right now, Columbus has 5 HIP units, up to abut 500 mm in diameter. Most of it is high temperature. In Columbus, we concentrate on 2000 C. All of our other plants are doing production work which is medical implants and turbine type parts and those are all 1225 C roughly.
DG: Let's talk about some of the more latest advances, some of the newer things that are coming onto the scene. You mentioned one, I know, and that was the ceramic oxides. Let's talk about that a little bit more, and also, are there any other advances in the HIPing world that we should know about.
CO: I've been in it from almost day one, and it hasn't changed much. If you look at HIP from 40 years ago and today, they'd look the same. We still use the same valves and fittings. The big thing that has changed is computer control. AIP was one of the very first, I won't say the first because, again, back at Battelle in 1973, they had a Foxboro PDP that was in the whole room and had tape reels in it. I remember seeing it run a HIP unit, you'd type in STOP and START. It was like a movie.
Around '93 or '94, AIP branched into computer control pretty hard and we've kind of led since then. It allows us to do a lot of things, number one is that we can run it remotely. So, in Mississippi, we actually run our plant from Columbus. They load it and we take it over here. Our guys here in Columbus, they run our units all night by staying at home and watching them. Computers really help us there. As for service, we were able to get on the computer and look at a piece of gear in Singapore and fix it. That's the thing that really helped us.
"Where we're advancing things is in furnace technology for high temperatures, getting these furnaces to last longer, making them more reliable. . . We're trying to hit the everyday guy and make him profitable, get parts in and parts out."
Where we're advancing things is in furnace technology for high temperatures, getting these furnaces to last longer, making them more reliable. That's kind of one of the keys because, again, with costs and the economics of HIP is you want not to have to be repairing it and replacing things all the time. That's what we concentrate on. We don't try to push the edge. I think some of our competitors really try to push the edge and do things that may or may not be beneficial or even needed, but they're just trying to push the edge of things. We're not. We're trying to hit the everyday guy and make him profitable, get parts in and parts out.
As far as the oxygen, that's because ceramics has been coming for a long time and it's still coming. It's just never really taken off yet, but sooner or later it has to because they're higher temperature, stronger materials in steels, it's just we are competing against forgings and we re competing against casting companies. That's kind of the whole thing with all the HIP companies. There are basically only four main players in the world. We are all kind of small. We all kind of try to work together as much as we can and we all make good equipment to try to advance HIPing technology. More than beating up on each other, we try to beat up on the forging companies and the casting companies. We want to take their business.
In the research here, a lot of what we're doing is trying to work on the higher temperatures and higher pressures. If you can go to higher pressure, you can drop the temperature which then minimizes grain growth. In many materials, that improves either clarity of the material, if it's a transparent ceramic, or it can improve the strength of a steel because you have better interlocking between small particles. We're trying to do a lot more in high pressure, high temperature than some of the other companies. A lot of the companies are just in the metals only; they really focus on that. We're doing some really odd things here. We do stuff that nobody else wants to fool with.
DG: And you have fun while you do it! I'm curious, just from my own purposes. I envision these things as kind of like bell furnaces, a cylinder. Is that true? And, how big, on average, is a HIP unit? What's the work zone dimensions, let's say?
CO: They start with our smallest one which is about the size of a desk and it has a work zone of about 3 inches x 4 inches. We can build a little bit smaller, but economy-wise, we just built that one small model and that is the smallest that anyone uses. It's the size you need for a tensile bar. Just about every university and lab has an AIP small unit. Then, they can go up to massive units. The large one in Japan that Quintus built is 82 inch hot zone. That's a big diameter. They're talking about a 100 inch or 110 inch hot zone.
DG: That's diameter. How tall was it?
CO: 3 meters. Some people are looking at 4 meters or even longer. I've been told that the Army said if you can put a whole tank in one, they'd do it. One of the drivers there is turbine blades. As the blades get bigger, like on jet engines, your turbo fan is the outer blades and so forth, those big shrouds as they get bigger, the gas economy gets better, so they would like to build massive engines and they would like some of those parts HIPed. They want really big HIP units. Another one is in nuclear reactors for small modular nuclear power. They'd like to replace some forgings and if they could do it with powder metallurgy lids, and so forth, and those need a 3mm diameter HIP unit. The majority of the work is in the 1 meter range.