HEAT TREAT RADIO

Heat Treat Radio #56: Metal Hardening 101 with Mark Hemsath, Part 3 of 3

Heat Treat Today publisher Doug Glenn finishes his conversation with Mark Hemsath about metal hardness basics. Mark, the vice president of Sales - Americas for Nitrex Heat Treating Services, was formerly the vice president of Super IQ and Nitriding at SECO/WARWICK. Learn all about the what, why, and how of hardening. This episode builds upon previous episodes in Part 1 and Part 2.

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):  This is our third episode with you, Mark, and the first episode basically we were just dealing with very general, kind of like “Hardness 101” – what is it, why is it important, what materials can be hardened, etc.  The second episode we delved a little bit further into specifics processes like carburizing, nitriding, etc.  If any of the listeners are listening now, they haven't listened to episode one and two, I would recommend that they go back and take a listen to those at their leisure.  What we wanted to do today really was just deal with some of the newer advances, why we're seeing some of those newer advances, why some of the processes are having a bit of a resurgence and talk through some of those things.

What we want to do today is to just deal with some of the newer advances, why we're seeing some of those newer advances, why some of the processes are having a bit of a resurgence and talk through some of those things.

Before we start, I'll just ask you straight up, is there anything from the last episodes that you think we need to reiterate or review, or do you think we did okay on those last ones?

Mark Hemsath (MH):  I think we did well, and I just wanted to say thank you, again, for letting me talk about this.  I think these are some great subjects and I really enjoy doing this.

". . . nitriding, and really its cousin FNC (ferritic nitrocarburizing), are actually fairly inexpensive treatments and they can be performed on final dimension parts.  There is no post machining and there is minimal distortion.  That's kind of my opinion of why it has done well."

DG:  Let's talk about this:  From my perspective, from what I hear around the industry, nitriding seems to be getting a lot of play time, to throw in a radio term.  You hear it a lot.  Why is that?  Why is it that nitriding seems to be growing in popularity?

MH:  Well, Doug, if you were to ask me, which you did, I think it's mainly due to the discovery that nitriding, and really its cousin FNC (ferritic nitrocarburizing), are actually fairly inexpensive treatments and they can be performed on final dimension parts.  There is no post machining and there is minimal distortion.  That's kind of my opinion of why it has done well.  Like I said, nitriding, not quite as much as FNC; they get lumped together but they are distinctly different.

DG:  So, FNC is really the most cost saving?

MH:  Yes, you're going to get a fairly hard surface on the part at fairly short cycle times and low temperature.  So, again, you can use that final dimension part.  You can control that white layer or compound zone, not only in terms of thickness, but also in terms of composition, in other words, how much epsilon versus gamma prime, and its porosity.  This allows for repeatable results and repeatable performance today.  This was not as easy 20 years ago, but it is today.

DG:  And that's because?

MH:  The enhancements of the equipment and controls technology.  We've come a long way with process control, and that sort of thing; it's substantially different.  I always make a joke when we do proposals for equipment, the thing that changes all the time is controls.  Electronics are constantly changing and improving.

DG:  One other question about nitriding before we move off of that:  Are we seeing that growth in popularity in any particular industries or any particular types of products, or would you classify it as across the board?  You and I have spoken before about brake rotors and things of that sort.

Find out more on nitrocarburizing by clicking the image above.

MH:  It has, you're correct.  They've found new uses for it, and brake rotors are one excellent example.  Whole new companies have emerged just to do that sort of process because of the volumes that are out there.  I think a lot of things are being done.  The nice thing about FNC white layer generation on a part is it also has corrosion control, and for automotive that makes a lot of sense.  They're discovering new uses for FNC.   And then nitriding, in general, has the ability in a lot of instances, as well as FNC, to replace carburizing, depending upon how you engineer the part.  There are a lot of reasons to be using nitriding.

DG:  You mentioned carburizing, so let's talk about the next process that I'm hearing a lot about, and that's low pressure carburizing.  Is it actually growing in popularity?  Are we hearing more about it?  And if so, why?

MH:  This is when I think it's a bit different, in my opinion.  I think the surge came many years ago when automakers discovered LPC and it had a lot of good benefits at the same time.  Now, aerospace has discovered it but the volumes aren't as high as they were with automotive.  LPC is a great process, however, I have been scratching my head as to why it has not become more prevalent, and I think I might have some answers for that.

DG:  What are they?  Why not more prevalent?

MH:  First, many applications of LPC, being vacuum in nature, were performed with high pressure gas quenching.  Quenching with high pressure gas limits both load size and materials that you can use that can be quenched in gas, as well as some part geometries, thicker cross sections, etc.  They're very hard to quench when you're dealing with certain steels or alloys with high pressure gas quenching.  Carburizing, which LPC is trying to replace or compliment, it's really a high volume championing of surface hardening.  Hence, per pound, prices are low.  Loads are large and dense and you bring in a better quality methodology but you have a lot of limitations on productivity.  It's going to get more expensive.

DG:  So, you're saying the reason LPC (low pressure carburizing) hasn't taken off is because of the high pressure gas quenching essentially, because you have to do smaller loads?

MH:  Yes.  To get good quenching with gases because of the nature of how the gases flow around the parts and quench them, even at 20 bar nitrogen or helium, it's just extremely difficult to get the quench rates for certain steels that are required.  It is very easy with liquids.

DG:  Right.  So, you've got to either lighten the density of the load so you get more of the gas flow, or more loads or whatever.

MH:  Yes.  In vacuum processing typically they spread the parts out further.  You have to do that for gas quenching because, depending upon where the gases come from, you don't want to be having one part in the path of another part because you're not going to get the same quench rate.  That's still somewhat possible with liquids like oil or water polymer, but certainly not as predominant.

DG:  So that begs the question: Can we do LPC with an oil quench or some sort of quench?  It's not high pressure gas?

MH:  Yes.  And it's been done for quite a long time.  They call it low pressure carburizing or vacuum oil quenching.  You can do both through hardening and carburizing in a vacuum chamber and then you can transfer to oil quenching.  Typically, the way that's been done, over all the years, is you transfer it in-vacuum from the vacuum heating chamber to the vacuum that's over the oil and then you put it into the oil.  That's what you call classical vacuum oil quenching.

DG:  We're talking about high pressure gas quenching and density of loads and things of that sort.  One of the things I have been hearing about is companies trying to do more either small lot semi-continuous processes or, in fact, single piece flow so that they can get around the issue of having to oil quench, they can, in fact, do single parts, high pressure gas quenching and things of that sort.  Comment on that for a little bit.  Are you seeing a growth there?

MH:  As you know, we do offer that product line for single piece flow, so yes, we've been working at it for many years.  One of the driving forces behind single piece flow is that people are already doing it with so-called press quenching.  In those instances, they're taking it out of, typically, a reheat furnace, taking the part out one by one and putting it into a fixture and then quenching it with oil in the fixture to stop distortion as that product cools.

That's a very slow process, very expensive, and very labor intensive unless you can automate that with robots etc.  It typically, like I mentioned, involves, if you're surface hardening, you're probably going to do that in a separate unit, carburize that, slow cool it and then you're going to put it back into a reheat furnace.  So, it really adds to the cost of those parts, but you get some tremendous distortion control on the parts.

"What we're seeing with [press quenching] is the distortion is very, very low, we're not using any oils, we're not using a press quench, we have very low labor inputs and we can put it in line with the manufacturing cell.  The only issue with that technology, and one of the reasons it's been a little bit slow to grow, is that you need relatively uniform part sizes and shapes and pretty large volumes.  But this would usually be part of the process plan."

DG:  That's in press quenching you're talking?

MH:  Yes, that's in press quenching.  Now, what we've come up with is something that we call a UniCase Master when you're doing case hardening with it, we also utilize what we call our 4D Quench.  The 4D Quench is a high pressure gas quench that actually takes many, many nozzles of high pressure gas and puts it right on the part.  The fourth dimension is that we actually spin that part.  If you have an irregular gear, you're getting that gas distribution that's coming out of many, many nozzles, distributed very uniformly all over the part.

What we're seeing with that process is the distortion is very, very low, we're not using any oils, we're not using a press quench, we have very low labor inputs and we can put it in line with the manufacturing cell.  The only issue with that technology, and one of the reasons it's been a little bit slow to grow, is that you need relatively uniform part sizes and shapes and pretty large volumes.  But this would usually be part of the process plan.  We've come up, now, with some varieties of that where we can actually change that 4D press quench to cover a range of sizes and you can program that into the software.

DG:  And on the 4D Quench or the UniCase Master in the quenching process, are you able to treat most of the grades of steel, even oil quench graded, most of those, or is it fairly limited?

MH:  No, it's actually very good.  What we've found is, because we're concentrating that cooling of the high pressure gas is very close to the surface.  I've mentioned before- you're in a batch load, let's say you're in a 24 x 24 x 36 inch load geometry with high pressure gas quench, well those gas nozzles are coming from very far away.  If you go to more standard large size, like a 36 x 36 x 48 inch, the nozzles are even further away from the source.  So, yes, you're getting mass flow across the products, but you're not getting much impingement.  In convective cooling you need jet impingement.  I spent my whole life on this.  As you may recall, I was involved with my father and he had patents on jet impingement.  We come from a long history of working with convection and jet impingement.  Our 4D Quench perfectly optimizes those gas jets coming out and at 4, 6 or 8 bar, we can do the same cooling rate on a gear that you can get with oil.  That's phenomenal.

DG:  How about some of the other advances that we've seen?  I've got a couple of others thrown down here that I'd like you to comment on.  Again, for the listeners, I want the listeners to know that Mark's a very gracious guy.  Even though he works with Seco Vacuum, I've asked him to comment on some other products that are not his, but he'll give you a good perspective on these things, at least an introductory perspective.

Let's talk about hybrid systems, if we can.  We're talking about an integral quench-type system which is where a lot of this hardening process goes on that we've been talking about.  Talk about the hybrid system.

MH:  As we talked before, the vacuum oil quenching has been done for a long time as has integral quench furnaces.  Gas carburizing or gas integral quench furnace has remained pretty much the same for 50 years.  You utilize an oil quench, you try to get as quickly as you can into that oil quench, you have agitation in the oil, which gives you pretty decent quenching.  When you do that in a vacuum oil quench, because you're putting a vacuum over the oil, you'll get too much out-gassing with standard oil so they've had to develop special oils for vacuum oil quenching.

A couple things with vacuum oils: Number one is they're not as fast, they're slower quenching because of the nature of how they make them and the other thing is they're kind of hard to wash off.  They tend to varnish on and give you more problems with that.  People that have to do vacuum oil quenching have learned to like it and do it, but people that are used to doing standard interval quench furnaces, if they like oil at all, which a lot of them don't, a standard oil integral quench furnace has fairly fast oil.  That allows you to put some pretty good sized loads, a lot of productivity, through a standard interval quench furnace.

What we decided to do was, we said, we want to keep that standard interval quench, and if we do that and marry it to a vacuum chamber that can do low pressure carburizing, how would we go about employing that?  We were able to create a furnace that did that.  We're using a standard quench standard oils and instead of having endogas as a blanket atmosphere, we use only nitrogen, dry pure nitrogen.

Then, in the heating chamber, number one is that if you're doing through hardening, you don't have any atmosphere; you're under vacuum.  The good news with being under vacuum is that you don't have any problem with decarb or picking up carbon of your part.  Under vacuum, the nature is that the carbon does not move around, it does not leave the part, and it does not go into the part.  It becomes very easy.  Regular integral quench furnace, you have to condition it and try to get it at the same carbon potential that you have in your part.  It gets a little tricky.  With this furnace, it's very, very simple.

As far as carburizing, when you do it in a low pressure mode – what we call LPC (low pressure carburizing) use only acetylene – you're doing it at fairly low pressure levels, typically in the 5-10 bar range and you're using just acetylene.  You're using what they call a boost diffuse.  Now the key to doing low pressure carburizing, and one of the reasons I think that it has had some issues is in the past, is you need good simulation software.  We happen to offer one called SIM-Vac* and it has years and years, if not decades, of experience behind it so that it's now a very handy tool for the heat treater to know what his cycles and recipes are going to look like in an LPC type furnace.

DG:  Basically, you're doing a vacuum heat cycle, pulling it out of vacuum into a nitrogen chamber and dunking it into a standard oil quench.

MH:  Yes.  We will back-fill with nitrogen at the end of the cycle.  You typically want to drop a little in temperature anyway before you quench, so there's no problem putting cold nitrogen in there.  You get to your transfer temperature and you transfer into the oil.

DG:  Cost comparison between a full vacuum oil quench and this hybrid type system?

MH:  We've done quite a few.  We have two things going against us.  We have electric heating and we're using nitrogen.  However, the gas guys have quite a bit of gas usage because they're using endo generators and there is quite a bit of energy consumed in those endo generators.  When you do the comparison, in a same temperature processing scenario, it's about equal.

However, because our equipment can go to higher temperatures without any challenge at all to our heating furnace, we can go with much faster carburizing cycles.  So, when you start those shorter carburizing cycles, you're using less energy and you're using less gases.  We actually will end up being a little more competitive.  It's kind of counter intuitive, but this is how it really is helping us.  Only going 100 degrees Fahrenheit higher, which is not very uncommon going from 1700 to 1800 degrees Fahrenheit, results in almost 50% faster carburizing times.

DG:  You're actually being more efficient with your equipment.

MH: Very efficient.  And you'll actually get more productivity out of our units if you take advantage of the higher temperature.  By going 100, 150, 200 degrees higher in Fahrenheit, you're not going to hurt the furnace, unlike a gas fired radiant tube where you're going to tear it up.

DG:  Comment a little about the true vacuum oil quench systems.

MH:  They are wonderful systems.  We make a great one called Case Master Evolution and we've had that for over 10 years.  It's a great product line.  A lot of other furnace companies have it.  I just read that one vacuum furnace company is going to be offering it in the next year or so.  I saw another vacuum furnace came out with a new line kind of touting the ecological aspects of it.  But we've been doing it for a long time, so we know how good it is.

The only issue with the vacuum oil quench is the equipment is a little more expensive.  For aerospace, that's not a problem.  The equipment is typically not quite as productive and it costs maybe 50% more than standard, basic integral quench furnaces.  That's why we came up with, what we call, our super IQ- try to get the costs down and have the benefits.

Then, based on that, can we also increase the productivity?  We found that we could and it turns out to be much more advantageous money-wise.  However, there are still specifications, there are still people that want to have that vacuum to vacuum transfer.  There are people that want to have that type of aerospace grade type processing.  Our equipment has done very well and I'm sure some of the other guys are selling theirs as well.

DG:  So, there is still a place, obviously, for a full vacuum oil quench system.  Back on the hybrid then, are there other companies that you know of?

MH:  No, I'm not aware of any.

DG:  So, the hybrid system, basically at this point, you guys are the only ones doing it.

MH:  There are two barriers to entry, obviously, into that market.  One obviously is having the vacuum oil quench technology and then converting that technology to what we have which is nitrogen gas, etc.  The other thing is, as I mentioned before, if you don't have the simulation programs, it's going to be hard for you to place it into very high production shops.  In an aerospace shop, you've got a lot of high end people around that can do that for you, that can set up the recipes, etc.  If you're in a basic commercial heat treat shop, you're not going to have that kind of personnel who can be doing that on cycles that change fairly rapidly, without a good tool, and we have that tool.

DG:  I want to ask you one last question.  It's kind of unrelated, kind of related, a little bit different.  We had a podcast we did recently, a four part series we did with Joe Powell with Integrated Heat Treat Solutions.  I'm curious your opinion on this.  He talked about this process of basic quenching, getting the whole surface of the part down to the martensite start temp which basically forms a case around the part and then you can, basically, slow conductive cool from the core inside out.  It has to do with hardening, so I wanted to just throw it out to you.  Did you get a chance to listen to those podcasts or parts of them, and what do you think of that whole process?

MH:  I did.  As you requested, I looked at the podcast on intensive quenching by Joe Powell.  I'll tell you that, I actually can't remember which show it was, one of the last or two heat treat shows, I actually ended up sitting next to him out in the hall somewhere and he handed me a piece of paper and said, “Here!  This is what we're doing.”  I was exposed to it before, but I got into it more now that you showed it to me.  It certainly is science based and he understands the issue of quenching very well.  I point out that our 4D Quench solves many of these issues, but he's coming from his angle on it, and I certainly agree with him.

As you may recall, I probably mentioned it before, my father was in the industry and had 65 patents, mostly heat treat related inventions.  Rarely did we make money off of these ideas.  So, I'm used to a lot of great ideas, but you can't make money.  I think it's challenging in this world of mass production heat treating, where we have carburizing being performed at 50 cents a pound to get engineers, like Joe is wanting to do, to focus on the whole part life cycle and combining that final quench phase with the part design.  I think it's a great idea but I just think it's hard to do.

We kind of know this from experience, and I won't get into it too much, but I think you may know that we have a process called PreNite where we prenitride our parts.  That is a similar type thing where we're trying to take advantage of things that we know are possible in heat treating and prenitriding it allows the grains to not grow when you go to higher temperature to try to get more productivity out of a piece of equipment.

The one thing you've got to do, though, is convince the engineer to use a different alloy so that you don't get grain growth in the core.  Convincing those guys is tough.  We just don't see engineers engaged enough to do this complex reengineering.  That's my opinion only.  I think that's where Joe is going to get some resistance.  I think his ideas are great, and of course, I totally agree with his approach to it.  I could go through some other ideas that I came up with just reading his is almost like should you misquench first before you dunk it in the oil so you get that outer case, as he talked about.  I think it's a lot of great of ideas.

What we need to do is find some really good engineers to break the barrier of those low risk takers that we have in engineering, and I think that's possible.  You may know everybody's out there talking to people like Tesla and SpaceX and some aerospace companies.  These guys are starting to break some of these barriers.  They're starting to saying we don't want to do the status quo, we want to do something different.  If we can do that, a lot more of these technologies will take off.

DG:  We need some early adopters to step up.

MH:  Early adopters.  And people who want to not just be yes-men but really think it through – the whole life cycle of a part, how it's designed and everything else.

DG:  So, dear listener, if you are one of those people, please call us.  We're interested.  We've got a couple of different technologies.  Mark, thanks a lot for your Hardness 101 and helping us out on these three.  I think we covered some good ground.

Doug Glenn <br> Publisher <br> Heat Treat Today
Doug Glenn
Publisher
Heat Treat Today

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


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 Treat Radio #56: Metal Hardening 101 with Mark Hemsath, Part 3 of 3 Read More »

Heat Treat Radio #55: Spotlight on 40 Under 40 Leaders (Part 3 of 3)

In a special Heat Treat Radio series, 40 Under 40 winners from the class of 2020 respond with their stories and insights of their life and work in the heat treat industry. This episode features the stories of Jamie Kuriger, Scott Cumming, and Shawn Orr.

Below, you can listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button and read a few excerpts from this episode.

 


 


Jamie Kuriger

"[I] Met a lot of different people, a lot of different industries where you typically wouldn't think that, on an everyday basis, that there'd be a need for heat treating, but that's kind of the cool thing about this industry."

"It [Covid-19] has made us have to diversify, look for new industries, look for new opportunities. . . We're seeing many many emerging markets, which I'm excited about."

"I'm blessed to be a part of this industry because it's, you know, it's able to be resilient. And the fact that there's still metal that needs to be heat treated, there's still so many opportunities."


Scott Cumming

"I was absolutely amazed at the range of products being treated. Maybe I was a bit naïve to how many products actually received some sort of thermal processing, from teeny screws all the way up to some giant crank shaft."

"As the younger generation, we must continue to question why things have been done a certain way. There's been many cases where I have been speaking with somebody about their current process, and ask how they've developed it. The response: that's the way it's always been done. In some cases, they don't even know why they're doing something a certain way. I love to find ways to improve and simplify processes and prove the old way is not always the best way."


Shawn Orr

"Prior to my involvement in the heat treating industry, I did not realize the material property benefits that heat can introduce for different materials."

"In recent years, things like digital communications, like ethernet IP, have been adopted by the industry giving better access to data from the furnace."

 


To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio so see all of the episodes.

Heat Treat Radio #55: Spotlight on 40 Under 40 Leaders (Part 3 of 3) Read More »

Heat Treat Radio #54: Metal Hardening 101 with Mark Hemsath, Part 2 of 3

Heat Treat Today publisher Doug Glenn talks with Mark Hemsath about hardening basics. Mark was formerly the vice president of Super IQ and Nitriding at SECO/WARWICK, and is now the vice president of Sales - Americas for Nitrex Heat Treating Services Learn all about the what, why, and how of hardening. This episode builds upon the first conversation in Part 1.

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 here talking about hardness, as it pertains to the metals world, metallurgy, and things of that sort.  First off, Mark, welcome back.

Mark Hemsath (MH):  Thanks, Doug, it's nice to be here.

DG:  For the record, we're recording this thing right before Thanksgiving, the day before Thanksgiving, so we've got turkey on the mind here.  I've known Mark for many, many years, in fact, I would say a couple of decades now, when he was with other companies and doing other things.  He's a very well-rounded person in the industry.  He's able to speak intelligently about a lot of different things, including surface hardness, through hardness and that type of stuff.

Last time, we talked about what hardness was and why it's important.  Afterwards, you and I had some conversations and there were a couple of things I think we wanted to supplement onto that first episode.  One of those things had to do with hardness testing.  Throw out what you were thinking about that.

MH:  I think on testing, the point here is that there are many scales for testing because we have many different types of material with different hardness.  When we start getting into some of the other materials, it changes a little bit.  In the steel realm of things, the most typical is to use a diamond tip weight to try to indent the material.  Based on the pressure it takes, we get a reading.  For instance, a very thin layer may require a different type of test because one style of test may not be set up to measure such a thin hardness.  This is typical in something like nitriding where you have a white layer.  Different types of testing methodologies – there is the Brinell, Vickers, Rockwell and Newage hardness testers, and there are a lot of other things out there, as well.  In general, we are trying to test the surface hardness and then also the hardness as it traverses through the material.

DG:  The other thing that you and I were talking about was other materials besides steels that were hardenable.

MH:  I'm not an expert on aluminum, but one of the materials that we talked about is aluminum, and quite frankly, SECO/Warwick has a separate division just dedicated to aluminum because it is different.    Let's take a look at aluminum first.  Aluminum is actually rather soft and has many other benefits.  It is very commonly used in aerospace and companies like Tesla are using it today, almost predominantly, for their cars.  Just like in steels, it can get harder by using alloying elements.  Most common alloying elements are copper, manganese, silicon, magnesium, zinc and lithium.  Hardening is typically by a precipitation or age hardening.  Tempering is also very common.  So, not all aluminum alloys can be heat treated, per se, but as I was mentioning, it is a whole different world and it requires a whole different set of expertise because it is kind of a unique metal.

DG:  How about titanium?

MH:  Titanium is an increasingly popular alloy.  It is expensive and it has very high strength to weight ratio.  It is almost as light as aluminum but much stronger and also has great resistance to corrosion.  Titanium can be alloyed to add properties to the metal and it can be nitrided at higher temperature making a very thin, hard layer that is gold in color, something that I've done a little bit of in the past.

On of the other materials that you asked about are stainless steels, and this is also a whole different breed.  Recently, in the last 5 – 10 or so years, surface hardening is being applied with great success and it is actually done at low temperatures to make a very hard surface and still retain the corrosion resistance.  When you harden stainless steels via nitriding at the higher temperatures, you do get high hardness but you lose corrosion resistance.  They've made quite a bit of inroads at the low temperature end of things, so called S-phase hardening.  Certain stainless steels, martensitic stainless steels, are actually hardenable by heating and quenching.  Those have, commonly, 11 – 17% chromium and no nickel and they have a higher carbon.  Austenitic stainless steels, typically at 300 series with nickel, do not harden by heating and quenching.  These steels, as I mentioned, can be surface hardened.  Ferritic stainless steels, which is another breed, are commonly a lot of the 400 series stainlesses have 10 – 30% chromium and they do not harden by normal means.  Then, we have some special so-called alloy 17-4 PH and some of the other ones are hardenable by aging.  So, I wanted to go through some of that.  There is a lot there.  But just to discuss all of the variety of different steels out there.

DG:  Let's dive into these five different hardening processes, which we want to talk about, to give our listeners a little better sense of exactly what the process is and how they might differ from one another.  The five we're going to cover are carburizing, nitriding, carbonitriding, FNC, or ferritic nitrocarburizing, and LPC, meaning low pressure carburizing.  Let's go back and just start with, probably, what I think, is the most popular or common one, which is carburizing.  Do you agree?

MH:  Yes, I would tend to agree, especially by pounds.

DG:  First off, what is it?  We covered this last time, but just briefly, let's talk about what carburizing is.

MH:  Very briefly, carburizing is the addition of carbon which adds hardness to the surface and, as I probably mentioned before, it needs to be done at elevated temperatures.  The higher the temperature, the faster the process.

DG:  Basically, break it down.  How's it done? What's the temperature?  What's the atmosphere? What are the times?  General things like that.

MH:  Typically, it's done above 1600 degrees F, which is the austenitic temperature range, and more commonly done at 1650 – 1750 F, which is 900 – 950 C.  In the old days, they put charcoal powder, which is a carbon, near the steel or maybe in a box, and they heated it and that's how they got carbon.  They actually got carbon monoxide gas to form at high temperature and got it to go into the steel.  This will actually crack the charcoal and give you the gas.  Some people still use this, especially if they've got some very big odd shapes; it's the only way to do it.  Somewhat, it is done in other countries, but not as much here.

There is also obviously the gaseous form which is called gas carburizing.  That is typically done with carbon monoxide gas, which is typically created from cracking natural gas or using a nitrogen methanol.  For endothermic gas, it's basically about 40% nitrogen, 40% hydrogen and 20% CO.  In order to increase the carbon content of that gas, people will inject a carbon containing gas like propane or natural gas, etc.

One other method that is still in use is salt bath.  It is also somewhat common and here they use a sodium cyanide (NaCN).  Basically, most of it being done today is with gas carburizing.

DG:  As far as the actual materials?  I assume most of it's going to be your steels being carburized?

MH:  Yes.  Virtually any steel or alloy can be carburized to some extent if it has iron in it.  Iron carbides will form.  Mostly less expensive steels are done.  The so-called low carbon, low alloy steels are typically the ones that are most frequently carburized to get high surface hardness and because they kind of like the core properties that come with it.

DG:  Equipment.  You already hit on this some, but obviously for salt bath, which you mentioned, you're going to have a salt bath piece of equipment to do it.  Gas carburizing is obviously done just inside of an atmosphere furnace, in some capacity, I assume.  Can it be done continuous and/or batch?

MH:  Yes.  The most popular is batch.  The integral quench furnace, which is usually an in-and-out furnace where you have endothermic gas both in the vestibule where you put it where the quench oil is.  Then you go into the furnace, you do your hot temperature carburizing in the same gas, and then you come out hot and you're protected and then you go into the oil quench, and everything is within that atmosphere.  That's the most common.  But, as you mentioned, continuous is very viable.  The only issue with continuous is it's pretty high production and it's usually the same process over and over.  That way you can maximize the use of your quench.  Because quenching might only be 20 – 30 minutes tops, whereas the carburizing cycle might be 8, 10 or 12 hours, you're not using that quench very often.  Continuous will allow you to use a quench much more frequently and that quench might be fairly expensive, so that makes sense for doing the same parts over and over.

DG:  Right.  If you've got super high production, that would be the way to go.  And, it is probably notable to point out here, that quenching is an important part of the carburizing process.  This is not true with some of the other surface modification stuff we're going to talk about down the road, correct?

MH:  Yes.  Quenching is usually done right afterwards, to save money and to make it economical.  That's not to say that there aren't many people, like in press quenching, that will actually carburize it, slow cool it and then heat it up again and then individually quench each part.  There are also some benefits to grain growth.  If you've got a very deep case, that carburizing might cause some growth in your grains.  If you slow cool it and then heat it up quickly again and quench it, you'll transform all that back to the properties that you want.  But, yes, typically all done together.

DG:  Can we carburize using induction technology?

MH:  I'm not familiar with carburizing. . . Induction is typically heating the outer surface and cooling it very quickly and keeping that very hard and then the core will still maintain its property.  That's a thermal surface engineering process induction.  I had an old engineering friend of mine, metallurgist expert, PhD, who calls it surface engineering or thermal chemical surface engineering, because we're using both a chemical process and a temperature process.

DG:  Anything else notable on carburizing before we move on to nitriding?

MH:  The only thing is the alloying elements are common in steels.  I mentioned before low alloy steels and high alloy steels.  Alloying elements common in steels are nickel, silicon, chromium, manganese and molydenum.  Silicon and nickel are less prone to absorb carbon, whereas the carbon potentially atmosphere is increased with elements like chromium, manganese and molydenum which form more stable carbides than iron.  Alloying elements can adjust the ability to carburize.

DG:  That's the basics on carburizing.  Let's move on to nitriding.  If you can, Mark, as we plow through this, maybe draw a bit of a comparison on, for example, temperature ranges and maybe cycle times and materials, and things of that sort.  So, what about nitriding?

MH:  Nitriding is a process where nitrogen atoms are diffused into the steel surface.  I believe that nitriding is more complex than carburizing because hardness, and the types of nitrides created, are dependent on a number of different factors.  So, depending on the process, either ammonia is used or an excited nitrogen atmosphere via a plasma generator can diffuse the nitrogen into the steel surface.  What's common with nitriding is it's done at a lower temperature.  The diffusion of nitrogen is a time and temperature dependent process, so the higher you take the temperature, the faster the process will go.  But, it's still performed at much lower temperatures than carburizing.  It's actually done in the ferritic range and not in the austenitic range, typically, 915 degrees Fahrenheit up to just under 1100 degrees Fahrenheit which is 490 C to 590 C.

Nitriding is a process where nitrogen atoms are diffused into the steel surface. I believe that nitriding is more complex than carburizing because hardness, and the types of nitrides created, are dependent on a number of different factors.

DG:  You're talking 500 – 600 degrees F, roughly, lower temperature than carburizing?

MH:  Yes.

DG:  That's the temperature range.  Obviously, the atmosphere is different because we've got nitrogen as opposed to carbon, but how about process time?

MH:  We talked about the temperature.  Obviously, if you're at the higher end of that temperature, you can go a little faster, but nitriding has been known to be slower than carburizing, and it is.  The diffusion process is slower.  Gas nitriding and plasma nitriding are the two main processes.  There is also ferritic nitrocarburizing, which is a form of nitriding with salts.  But gas nitriding uses ammonia as a nitrogen donor and plasma nitriding uses nitrogen at a partial pressure with a plasma excited atmosphere.  Nitrogen creates iron nitrides in various forms in the white layer as either, what we call, an epsilon layer or a gamma prime layer.  In some instances, people don't even want that layer, they only want the nitrogen to go into the steel and create nitrides with some of the alloying elements.  This is what we call the diffusion into the alloy into the steel into the alpha.

DG:  What about case steps between carburizing and nitriding?  If you want a deeper case step do you tend to go carburizing or is there a difference in the case depth actually?

MH:  It is much more possible to do a deep case step than carburizing.  You can basically keep sending it in there and, if you can go a little bit higher temperature, you can get some pretty deep case steps with carburizing.  The difference between the nitriding, is that it's a different process.  It's a lower temperature process so it's a little bit slower, but you get a pretty hard case with the right alloy with the nitrided case.  In many instances, you can get a pretty similar performance of the part, or something that performs very well, with maybe only one-third of the case.

DG:  When we talked about carburizing, we talked about materials that were 'carburizable'.  How about in nitriding?  What materials are easiest to be nitrided and are there some that we really can't nitride?

MH:  Nitriding is kind of opposite from carburizing.  Most people will carburize the more low alloy or plain steels, whereas in nitriding, we really want to deal with alloy steels that have alloys in it that will be friendly to absorbing nitrogen.  Now, on plain hardened steels, you can get the white layer on there, but you're basically limited to just the white layer for your surface engineering, and you don't get much depth, depending upon what type of alloying elements you have.

DG:  Mark, talk for just a second about this white layer in non-technical terms, if you don't mind.  Is it, simply, the accumulation of nitrogen above the 'surface' of the metal?  What is that white layer?

MH:  No, it actually reacts with the metals in the surface layer.  Because the surface is being hit with a lot of nitrogen, the reactions there will create what we call a white layer where there is a lot of nitrogen activity and those are iron nitrides.  They also will get some carbon that will react in there.  That's a very hard layer, somewhat brittle; it is resistant to corrosion and it also has very low friction property.  A lot of people want that often but when you're going with the higher alloyed steels, there are some applications where you don't want that, let's say, bearing types et cetera where you don't want any small parts that could come off.  The white layer is prone to chipping or coming off, so you wouldn't want that in a bearing, because it's very hard and if it comes off, it can cause problems with your bearing.

DG:  I assume, with all the modern day technology and whatnot, we're able to control that white layer and/or depth of nitriding layer through your process controls and things of that sort.

Leszek Maldzinski
Professor at Poznań University of Technology
Project Leader and Scientific Adviser at SecoWarwick

MH:  Yes.  Nitriding has been around a long time, but one of the problems that they had was controlling the white layer.  Because they basically would just subject it to ammonia and you kind of got what you got.  Then they learned that if you diluted it, you could control it.   That's with gas nitriding.  Then plasma nitriding came around and plasma nitriding is a low nitriding potential process.  What that means is it does not tend to want to create white layer as much.  It's much easier to control when the process itself is not prone to creating a lot of white layer, unlike gas.  Now, in the last 10 – 15 years, people have gotten really good at controlling ammonia concentrations.  They've really learned to understand that. One of the people who was instrumental in understanding that is the inventor of our zero flow control technology, Leszek Maldzinski. Understanding how you change the ammonia nitriding potential to get the type of steel layers that you want is rather complex, but once you understand it and have the tools, you can craft the layer exactly the way you want it with ammonia gas.

DG:  You did talk about the types of equipment that can do nitriding, but just hit on those again.

MH:  Gas nitriding is typically done in a retort to safely hold the ammonia and once the gases start dissociating, we also have hydrogen in there.  Also, ammonia gas is very noxious and can be deadly, so you need something tight to hold it, and that's why they'll do it in a very tight retort.  Plasma nitriding is done under vacuum, partial pressure.  You can do that either in a hot retort or a cold wall vacuum type furnace.  Those are the two main processes.

DG:  If you had a similarly sized carburizing furnace and a nitriding furnace, would you expect that the nitriding furnace would cost more than the carburizing furnace, or vice versa?

MH:  Carburizing furnaces are a little more expensive because you have the addition of the quench and you're also at fairly high temperature.  Those are two cost drivers in carburizing.

DG:  This next one has always been a little confusing for me. Let's see if you can straighten me out:  We talked about carburizing, which is carbon.  We talked about nitriding, which is nitrogen.  And now we go to something called carbonitriding, which sounds to me like the two are holding hands and performing the process.  So, what is it?

"It can be confusing because here in the US we call it carbonitriding and we call the form of nitriding that is FNC (ferritic nitrocarburizing), nitrocarburizing.  In Europe, I've heard them exchange those names.  But, typically, in the US, we call the high temperature process, which is similar to carburizing, we call carbonitriding.  The ferritic, which usually means the low temperature, not austentitic, ferritic nitrocarburizing is a low temp form of nitriding and adding carbon.

MH:  It can be confusing because here in the US we call it carbonitriding and we call the form of nitriding that is FNC (ferritic nitrocarburizing), nitrocarburizing.  In Europe, I've heard them exchange those names.  But, typically, in the US, we call the high temperature process, which is similar to carburizing, we call carbonitriding.  The ferritic, which usually means the low temperature, not austentitic, ferritic nitrocarburizing is a low temp form of nitriding and adding carbon.  Let's go to carbonitriding which is the high temperature version.  It's typically done in low or unalloyed steels that have rather low hardenability.  Increasing the quench rate is rarely possible, so what we do is we add nitrogen and carbon to the surface to increase the surface hardness substantially.  It actually makes a very hard surface.  I usually say this is done for the cheaper steels.

DG:  Meaning the less hardenable steels?

MH:  Yes, and it's done in less alloyed steels, too, because we're just trying to get a thin hard surface on the outside, for whatever application it is.

DG:  And temperature range?  Does it tend to be similar to carburizing, up in the 1600 range?

MH:  It is, but because ammonia breaks down very rapidly at higher temperatures, we like to do this at the lower end of the austenitizing temperature, so in the 1600 – 1650 range, as opposed to the 1700 – 1800 range of carburizing.  Now, that means that the carbon transport to carbon diffusion into your steel surface will be slower, but what we're trying to do is we're trying to get both in there, the carbon and the nitrogen to make that very hard, thin surface.  And, we're trying to do it quickly, because we want to do it cheaply.

DG:  Is carbonitriding kind of an inexpensive way, if you can do it, of carburizing?

MH:  That's what I typically look at it as, yes.  And, it's possible to do a lot of these parts.  Let's say they're stampings or low expense steels.  You can sometimes do that also with ferritic nitrocarburizing if you change the steel grade a little bit.  There are a lot of different ways of hardening some of these small parts or clips or what have you.  Also very common in screws, roofing screws, etc, to get that hard point on there.  It doesn't need to be very thick, it only needs to be drilled into the roof one time.

DG:  So that's carbonitriding.  We talked about temperature ranges.  We talked a bit about the steels that we would use for that.  Equipment that is being used for carbonitriding?  I assume it's more along the lines of the carburizing?

MH:  It's virtually identical.  It's either gas atmosphere, integral quench batch furnace or can be done in continuous fashion.  A lot of people use mesh belts for it, too.

DG:  I neglected to ask you this, back on nitriding.  No quench is involved there, correct?

MH: Correct.  Nitriding has no quench.

DG:  But carbonitriding, you're quenching, because it's kind of a cheap man's carburizing.

Anything else we should know about carbonitriding?

MH:  Just that steels like 1018, 1022, the low end, there are other ones that obviously can be done, but that's typically what's being used.

DG:  Let's go on to the second to last.  We've got two more left.  Nitrocarburizing, or as it's commonly or often referred to, FNC    (ferritic nitrocarburizing), let's talk about it.

MH:  Unlike carbonitriding, which is often confused with ferritic nitrocarburizing, FNC is performed at lower temperatures just like nitriding, but it's typically done a little bit higher temperature than nitriding and it's done just below the initial austenitizing temperature which is around 570 C/1060 F, just below 1100 F you can go to if you're equipment is fairly uniform.  The reason they do that is because in ferritic nitrocarburizing, you're trying to create white layer, and white layer will be much more aggressively created at higher temperatures and also with higher levels of ammonia.

DG:  So, the temperature is the same.  Cycles times.  Obviously, the atmosphere is predominantly nitrogen with a little bit of carbon mixed in, I assume.

MH:  Right.  The nitrogen comes from the ammonia, unless it's a plasma type process, but let's talk gaseous ferritic nitrocarburizing first.  You can put a carbon gas in.  This can be an endogas to get CO, it could be CO2 injected where the CO2 actually will convert to a CO gas, and people have used other gases, but those are the two most popular forms of carbon gas.  What that does, again, because we have typically cheaper steels, they don't have a lot of carbon in the surface, so we want to have a little extra carbon there to get that really hard and aggressive epsilon layer.

DG:  Equipment to be used.  In nitriding, we were potentially using a vacuum furnace, at times.  Do we use vacuum for FNC?

MH:  Well, FNC, just like nitriding, you don't need vacuum for our nitriding furnace, we use vacuum purge.  Because we want the vessel retort to be very tight, making it a vacuum capable vessel, means it's, by definition, tight because you don't want ammonia to leak out.  But, for FNC, people have done this in any number of ways.  For example, bell furnace or tip up furnace.  I've seen people use their integral quench furnaces, the heating chamber.  All you have to do is get to that temperature just below 1100 F, get your ammonia in there and get some sort of carbon gas, and you're going to get a white layer.

DG:  I know when we were talking about nitriding earlier, you mentioned that it was done mostly in a retort, one reason was to contain the ammonia, but you don't necessarily need that in FNC?  Or, is it pretty common that you would use a retort furnace?

MH:  It's commonly done in a retort and commonly done in a pit furnace, but there are people who do it in tip up furnaces.  Like I said, there are people who do it integral quench furnaces, people do it continuously.  Obviously, when you have ammonia involved, the retort makes the environment that you're standing there much nicer, because you can put the ammonia in the furnace as opposed to around you.  Small amounts of ammonia can become choking.  I don't like other furnace designs because they're hard to seal.

DG:  Anything else you think we should know regarding nitrocarburizing?

MH:  It can be done in plasma.  It's less common.  They typically use a carbon gas like methane, or something, to put in there to try to promote some more white layer.  Like I mentioned before, plasma process is typically not very white layer friendly.  But if you put that carbon gas in there and increase the temperature, you can get some pretty decent white layer with it in a plasma setting.

DG:  Let's move on to the last one: low pressure carburizing.  Let's talk about that.

MH:  Again, carburizing is the addition of carbon, right?  So, the difference here is that when we talk low pressure, it's just like a mentioned before with plasma nitriding, it's done at a negative pressure, less than atmosphere.  We call this either low pressure carburizing or vacuum carburizing; it's the same process.  This takes place at pressures typically in the 1 to 15 torr range, which is about 1 to 20 millibar range of pressure.  If you know one atmosphere is 760 torr, so when we're going down to 1 – 15 torr, we're at pretty good vacuum.  Just like with gas carburizing, the higher the temperature, the faster the process.  What's unique with vacuum equipment, is that vacuum equipment is typically capable of going to higher temperatures which adds to the speed of carburizing.  Now, we didn't discuss the design of gas carburizing furnaces that much, but typically they're gas fired and they have radiant tubes.  In the interior of the furnace, the higher temperature you go with the really nasty carburizing atmosphere, it reduces the life of those furnaces substantially, so the people that own the furnaces don't want to go to high temperature.  If you can go 100 degrees higher in temperature, like you can with the vacuum carburizing furnace, the process gets much faster.  That means higher productivity.

One more feature, as well: the initial carburizing of steel at low pressures is actually faster than gaseous  carburizing.  The carbon flux of the surface is very high in LPC.  The diffusion is the same, once you get into the steel itself, but the flux to the surface is very high.  So, shorter, shallower cases are quick, and then, like I said, if you can increase the temperature to increase the diffusion into the steel, on deep cases you can get the cycle less than half.

DG:  How long has LPC been around?

MH:  Technically, it's been around since probably the late 60s.  It had a very slow introduction, in my mind.  That's only because they had trouble really getting it to work reliably.

DG:  Anything else we should be asking?  I assume the steels that can be carburized with LPC are essentially the same?

MH:  Yes.  Steels are the same.  Typically, you want to go a little higher temperature than you would with gas carburizing, so typically above 1700 F and more likely 1750 F – 1850 F.  The big difference is with gas carburizing, as I mentioned, we use endothermic gas which comes from natural gas and then with some enrichment, here the carbon carrier is typically acetylene and that's put in at low pressure.

The other thing is, in gas carburizing, they use oxygen probes and they try to figure out exactly what the carbon potential of the atmosphere is.  It's totally different with low pressure carburizing.  With low pressure carburizing, because you can't really measure it reliably and accurately, we use process simulation software to create the recipes.  By being able to model the surface area of the parts and the total weight of the parts and the material, the temperature and the case thickness that you want, the LPC process becomes very reliable and can perform very well.

DG:  We've had conversations with folks over at Dante Solutions and they say that this LPC is one of the most read items on their website; people are trying to figure out how to do it and how to avoid the carbides and things of that sort.  It sounds like an interesting process.

Anything else we need to talk about on LPC?

MH:  I would like to point out that most LPC has been done in vacuum furnaces in the past with high pressure gas quenching.  You mentioned it's been around a long time.  What they found with high pressure gas quenching is, number one, you can't have a lot of parts in the furnace, which means you have smaller load sizes.  In order for the gases to quench, you have to have very high pressure and also, the parts can't be that thick.

Over time, it really hasn't taken off the way I think it should have.  And some of the equipment was kind of problematic.  There was always done vacuum and oil quenching, but when they combined, and a few manufacturers do this, vacuum and oil quenching with LPC, then the oil quenching allows you basically to use the same steels to get the quench rates and to start to get some heavier loads in your furnace so that you can get the productivity.

This has now driven, what I consider to be, a viable option to gas carburizing.  For instance, with our Super IQ furnace, we use a conventional oil quench.  It's no different than the standard oil quench that most people use in their integral quench furnace.  However, the heating is done in LPC.  The difference is, instead of transferring the load in vacuum, which is what a conventional vacuum furnace will do, or transferring it in a hydrogen and nitrogen atmosphere, we transfer it only in nitrogen.

We have found out that there is no added IGO or any other problems with doing that.  What ends up happening is you can make a less expensive furnace and you don't have to use vacuum quench oils, which are a different breed- they're not as fast, they're more difficult to wash off and clean off.  We think that combination of LPC and standard oil quench makes a very high performing furnace with LPC.  So, it puts LPC into a new interest level, in my mind.  But, again, you still have to have very reliable simulation software.  We have over 10 years of experience putting that software together, so it's very reliable.

DG:  Just so the listeners know, we're doing a 3-part series and we're in #2 right now.  Next time we are going to talk about some of the more conceptual things regarding nitriding LPC and we're going to even talk a little bit about single piece flow because there's been a demand for single piece flow.  We're going to talk about some of the recent advances in some of these systems which we've hit on here just briefly.

Mark, I appreciate it.  This time, I think we've done a good job at covering carburizing, nitriding, carbonitriding, nitrocarburizing and a little bit on LPC.  Next time, we'll look forward to talking with you more about some of these other things.

Doug Glenn, Publisher, Heat Treat Today

Doug Glenn, Heat Treat Today publisher and Heat Treat Radio host.


To hear this episode and other Heat Treat Radio podcasts, please check out heattreattoday.com/media/heat-treat-radio

Heat Treat Radio #54: Metal Hardening 101 with Mark Hemsath, Part 2 of 3 Read More »

Heat Treat Radio #53: Spotlight on 40 Under 40 Leaders (Part 2 of 3)

In a special Heat Treat Radio series, 40 Under 40 winners from the class of 2020 respond with their stories and insights of their life and work in the heat treat industry. This episode features the stories of Kelly Peters, Bryan Stern, and Andy Muto.

Below, you can listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button and read a few excerpts from this episode.

 


 


Kelly Peters

Kelly Peters, Vice President of Operations, ALD Thermal Treatment

“I thought that this gig would buy me some time to figure out what I wanted to do when I grew up. Turns out, I grew up here in the plant, and here I am today.”

“There is so much uncertainty and less opportunity in our business at the moment. Major consumers of heat treat are at crossroads: Will the automotive industry go electric, hybrid, stay with engines, or what, and when?...So how do I run a business and plan for the future in so much uncertainty?... Just like any family, will face the challenges together and be better for them.”

“Give those favors time to mature and develop. You never know where they’ll lead unless you give them a chance.”


Bryan Stern

Bryan Stern, Advanced Development Engineer, Solar Manufacturing

“Working at Solar Manufacturing [it’s been] very fulfilling; with the vacuum equipment there’s pressure vessel design, fluids, the design of the water systems, thermodynamics going into that, heat transfer, structural analysis… There’s just a lot of depth and really because it’s, in many cases, a fairly homegrown movement, there’s a lot of room for improvement.”

“From what I’ve seen with almost the disconnect between a customer and what a piece of equipment could do for them if it was applied correctly: There’s a lot of room to bring value to a customer for their process in ways that haven’t really been imagined before.”


Andy Muto

Andy Muto, Operations Manager, Paulo

“I originally was planning on doing my own thing after college in logistics, and did so for a number of years, but in 2014 I decided to move back home and work for Paulo.”

“What really intrigues me in the heat treatment industry is how many different applications require some form of heat treating in order for parts to perform to the necessary level that they need to in the field.”

 


To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio so see all of the episodes.

Heat Treat Radio #53: Spotlight on 40 Under 40 Leaders (Part 2 of 3) Read More »

Heat Treat Radio #52: Fluxless, Inert Atmosphere, Induction Brazing with Greg Holland, eldec LLC

Heat Treat Radio host, Doug Glenn, interviews Greg Holland from eldec LLC on fluxless, inert atmosphere, induction brazing which could be a viable alternative to some flux-base furnace brazing applications.

Below, you can either listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button, or you can read an edited version of the transcript.

 



The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.
Doug Glenn (DG): We are here today with Greg Holland, a sales engineer at eldec LLC, in Auburn Hills, outside of Detroit, Michigan, and we’re going to talk today about a type of interesting induction technology. But first, tell us a little bit about you, your company, position, and how long you've been in the industry.

Greg Holland (GH): I'm a sales engineer at eldec. My main duties are inside sales, marketing activities, trade show coordinating, as well as being a coordinator and scheduler for our in-house coil shop.

Inert gas brazing: set-up
Source: eldec LLC

I've been in the induction industry here for about five years now. Prior to that, I spent time in both air filtration and the thin films industry. I feel that my experiences there have really given me a wide background. It's made me a well-rounded engineer, in my humble opinion, but it's also given me a lot of perspective and some background knowledge that some of my colleagues here don't necessarily have, which has been a good thing.

eldec was established in Germany in 1982 by a gentleman named Wolfgang Schwenk. In 1998, he packed his family up and moved here to Michigan. He established what was at the time eldec Induction USA in 1998. His goal was to better cover the North American market, and what better way to cover a market like that than to be in the market? He continued to have eldec in Europe, and then he started it here in the US.

In 2001, we moved into the building we're in now, and we've been here ever since. We've grown the facility a couple of times; in 2013, eldec, as a whole, was purchased by the EMAG Group from the machine tool industry, which I'm sure a lot of your listeners are familiar with. At that time, we changed our name to eldec LLC.

DG: Greg, is there an area of specialty that eldec focuses on, or is it “all things induction”?

GH: I would say all things induction. Our office, in particular, does not do a lot of the heat treating. That is handled by our sister company here in the US, EMAG. This is mainly because if they're selling the machine tools, they are typically the customers that are then looking to heat treat. So, it makes more sense for just one person to knock on the door. I'm not saying that we aren't versed in heat treating, we definitely are. Prior to 2013, all of that was sold out of our office in North America, and we have process development capabilities that, I would say, rival what our sister company EMAG has. They are also in the Detroit area.

DG: We're going to talk about something you and I have spoken a bit about, and that is induction, fluxless, inert atmosphere. Let's start at the very basics and work our way through. What is this thing we're talking about?

GH: When you're brazing in normal air, you end up with oxides on your parts. If you don't get the oxides off of your parts, then they end up in the joint between the metal layers and the alloy. A lot of times, people will use a flux. What we are looking to do here is to eliminate the need for that flux; so, we would use an inert atmosphere.

"We are looking to try to get rid of that flux because it adds steps in your process, meaning you have to apply the flux. Then afterward, you have to clean the flux off of the part. A lot of customers aren't afraid to do that, but it's cycle time, right? You have an extra step."

DG: Basically, we're talking about brazing in an atmosphere, using induction without flux, and the primary reason is to get rid of those oxides. You kind of answered this already, but why do we need it? Why do we need that type? What's wrong with using flux?

GH: A typical braze process would use that fluxing agent, so it's either an extra paste that you would put on, or in the event that you have your brazing copper, you would have maybe a silver alloy that would have phosphorous in there. That phosphorous acts as the flux. As the alloy melts the phosphorous, it interacts with the copper oxides and basically cleans the joint for you. It also allows the alloy to wet flow and fill the joint gaps.

We are looking to try to get rid of that flux because it adds steps in your process, meaning you have to apply the flux. Then afterward, you have to clean the flux off of the part. A lot of customers aren't afraid to do that, but it's cycle time, right? You have an extra step. So, it's time, or maybe it's an extra person, whatever the case may be. By eliminating that flux, you've eliminated those steps. You don't have to worry about cleaning the part afterwards, and if you're washing the parts to get the flux off, then you don't have to figure out what to do with that wastewater.

DG: Walk us through a typical braze process that uses flux. Let me try this and you tell me if I'm good. Basically, you've got to apply the flux, and then you also have to apply some sort of a braze paste, I would assume, correct? The actual filler material?

GH: Yes. You can use a paste. What we typically use is solid alloy. If you're brazing, say in tube brazing where your joints are round, a lot of the alloy will come as a ring. You can get it specially made from a supplier as a ring, so it slides right down over your tube. If you have plates that you're brazing together, you can get a foil. It's essentially a thin sheet that you can put between the plates. You can also use a stick form, almost like a welding stick or welding rod type. Or, if you have a trough that you're trying to braze, you can get it in pellet form--little solid pieces that will go down into that trough.

DG: So, if you were doing it with flux, you would apply a flux first, then those things, and then, of course, you'd have all of the cleanup of the flux afterwards, I assume.

GH: Correct. And typically, even before you put the flux on, you want to clean the parts and make sure that you don't have dirt and dust and other types of debris in there, too.

DG: It sounds like this brazing process, where it's fluxless, is replacing a standard flux-based brazing. We've already answered the question about the significance of fluxless; basically, you're not having to use that. The other part of the description is that it's in an inert atmosphere. I would imagine that everybody knows what an inert atmosphere is, but if you don't mind, explain what is inert atmosphere and why we need it for this process.

GH: By definition, an inert gas is essentially a gas that doesn't react with anything. You're looking at helium, argon, or nitrogen. Technically, an inert atmosphere could also be a vacuum. What the goal is here, amongst some other things, is to get the oxygen out and away from the joint. By using a vacuum, you have to essentially create a chamber that is airtight. Because, as you pull a vacuum, if it's not airtight, the oxygen in the normal atmosphere is going to be seeping into that chamber.

The advantage of an inert gas atmosphere is, by filling the chamber with a nitrogen or an argon, you essentially create a higher pressure in the chamber than you do in normal atmosphere, and so you don't have to be airtight. In all actuality, you don't want to be airtight because you want to be able to purge that space and allow the air that is in there to flow out.

DG: So, you're back filling. And, by the way, for those listening, we will put a link on the transcript of this podcast, to the video that you sent that actually shows that process. It's hard to see on radio!

GH: That's actually a process that we have as part of our trade show display. At various trade shows we'll have different displays, and that one in particular, is stainless steel brazing in an inert atmosphere.

Inert gas brazing: at braze temperature
Source: eldec LLC

DG: I'll describe it here just for a bit. Basically, there is a cylinder and they've got two parts inside that need to be brazed together. The cylinder, let's say it's a foot in diameter and maybe 16 or so inches tall, is a clear glass cylinder that comes down over the parts. I assume that you back fill with an argon or a nitrogen, and flush all of the oxygen out, and then it goes through a certain heating cycle and certain different KW and whatnot, and then cools at the end. Then, the lid lifts and you're off and running. That's basically how it looks

DG: Describe to us, if you don't mind, some of the industries that would use this process. What are the applications here?

GH: What we see is more so with stainless steel tube brazing, like fluid lines, automotive fuel lines, and that kind of a thing, where the end product doesn't get painted. It could be in an area that is visible to people, though, so they want it to look aesthetically pleasing. Those are the industries and processes where this gets used, but, ultimately, it can be used in any brazing application where you're currently using flux and don't want to have that additional step.

DG: You mentioned the automotive industry. Are there any other industries that you've seen it used in?

GH: We've had some other customers with essentially fittings on the end of a tube type of an application. I don't know what type of industries they ended up putting those into, but things like that are typically where we see these. But, again, it can be anything where you're heating, and honestly, it doesn't even have to be just brazing. If you have to heat something like that, you don't want to have the oxide layers and the discoloration. If you are back filling and purging that chamber with the inert gas, then as the part cools, and you allow it to cool in that inert atmosphere below the oxidation temperature, then you end up with a part that essentially doesn't even look like it was heated.

DG: Could this inert, fluxless, induction brazing potentially replace belt furnace brazing? Perhaps in some batch processes or torch brazing? Are there any savings in the process as far as manpower? I'm assuming you've still got to have somebody loading up the fixture to be brazed, right?

GH: Sure. You still have to have the fixture loaded. Depending on how the cell is laid out, it could be loaded manually, and it could be loaded by robot. You have some manpower requirements there. Typically, the actual loading isn't that much different than what you would have to do to load those parts into a fixture going through a belt furnace or to load them into a fixture heating them with a torch.

The advantage of induction over those two is not necessarily capital investment, but operating costs in the long run. You don't have the high cost of your gas. Typically, induction is more efficient than a furnace. It is a lot more efficient than a torch. You've got a guy out there with a torch that is heating your part, and then all of a sudden, he takes the torch and points it away as he does something else. All the while, the is gas burning, doing nothing. Again, with the furnace, whether you have a part flowing through there or not, you're heating that furnace and keeping it hot.

DG: Exactly. Whereas with induction, you're applying the heat and being done with it. Describe in a little bit more detail the actual process for an inert brazing process, fluxless.

GH: The chamber that you saw in the video is a large glass cylinder. They're not typically built like that. That one is built so that you can show it off and allow people to see what's actually going on. A lot of times, the chambers are much smaller. The goal is to make the space that you have to purge as small as possible, but still contain all areas of the part where the heat is going, because all of the space in that chamber has to be purged. That's an expense, so you want to limit that.

Now, depending on how long that purge cycle takes, how large your parts are, how long it takes to get to the temperature where oxidation starts to occur, you can start heating before the purge cycle is even done as long as you make sure that by the time you hit that oxidation temperature, all of the oxygen is gone. Then, you heat your part up to whatever temperature you need for your specific process.

Inert gas shield braze process where the customer wanted to eliminate oxidation in the joint area but was not concerned with oxidation of any other area of the part. As you can see in Figure A, the braze area and pipe coupling are inside of an inert gas shield and are not oxidized, whereas the housing is clearly oxidized (Figure B) as the braze cycle finishes.
Source: eldec LLC

In brazing, it depends on what type of alloy is being used and what your base metals are. And then, depending on how the coil design had to be designed for your process in your part shape, you might have to allow some additional soak time. Say you are putting a really weird-shaped fitting on the end of a part; you might not be able to get a full surround coil over the tube that's going into that fitting and realistically get that back out of the assembly. You might have a coil that only goes around 120 or 180 degrees, so to allow the heat to transfer around to the rest of that joint and come to a uniform temperature for the alloy to flow, a lot of times you have a little bit of a soak time. Which is what you see in that video, as well. After the soak time, the operator can typically see through a little window; or with our power supplies, we create a recipe with a set temperature, set power, whatever the case may be if you're using a pyrometer or not, and a specified length of time, and through a little bit of process development in the very beginning, we can create that recipe. So, from a push of a button, the operator doesn't even have to see, necessarily, whether the alloy is flowing or not.

We know for development you need this much power at this much time, maybe you need two or three steps at different powers and different times, and then, all of a sudden, you know that you're going to have a good joint, you shut the power off and allow the part to cool again in that inert atmosphere. If you're not worried about aesthetics, maybe you have a part that's going to get painted and the oxides are going to affect the adhesion of that paint, or you know that you're going to have to bead blast the part anyway, maybe you're not worried about it cooling in the atmosphere, in which case you don't have that cooling step, you can just open the chamber (but be careful because then you just have a hot part). You could essentially just open the chamber and pull that part out.

DG: Would you have to do it all in an inert atmosphere, if that were the case?  If you weren't worried about the oxides, you could almost do it without, at all, right?

"What we typically see there, is we're up against a furnace brace and it boils down to not only capital investment, but operating costs in the long run, what the part volumes are."

GH: If you're just heating the part. But if you're looking to braze the part, you still either have to use the flux or the inert atmosphere to keep the oxide out of the joint area.

DG: It went through the cooling process, so now it's done.

GH: Yes, that's basically the process. Then, your chamber would open once the parts cool and your operator or your robot could unload the part and load the next one. Because of the purge and cool down time, a lot of customers will end up with a unit, a power supply, that has multiple outputs on it.

For example, we’ve built a unit with three outputs for a customer multiple times. So, in that particular case, there’s a part that has two or three different braze joint locations on it. However, what you are essentially looking at is the operator. Even if it's the exact same part in all three cases, the operator can load the part in one location, allow it to start purging, and then he can load the part in the next location. When the purge cycle is over, you can have that heat time automatically start with a self-controller.

So, the operator is literally just loading station after station, and when the first one is done, the second one is loaded, purged, and ready to heat; then the third one, and off you go. By the time the operator comes back to the first one, the part is cool, the chamber opens, and he takes it out.

Essentially, you just have an operator that is loading and unloading parts and you've saved all that cycle time by having a machine that is incrementally more capital investment but saves you so much in cycle time and process flow.

DG: Right. So, you're using that cooling time or soak time to do another function which keeps your production up. Can you tell us, without naming companies, any specific examples of where this was implemented and specifically what processes it might have replaced?

GH: The one that had the three outputs that I just talked about was for automotive fuel lines. Again, I can't say the customer’s name, and I can't say which OEM the parts actually went into, but I can tell you that it was automotive fuel lines. What we typically see there, is we're up against a furnace brace and it boils down to not only capital investment, but operating costs in the long run, what the part volumes are. If it's a car model that they don't sell a lot, then they may not be able to justify the capital cost of the induction, but if you're running typical automotive volumes, then the induction portion, split over however many hundreds of thousands of parts a year, is peanuts in the end.

DG: Do you have a sense of what the cost savings was per part or anything of that sort on that example you gave?

GH: Unfortunately, I don't. A lot of our customers don't share that kind of information.

DG: Wouldn't it be nice if they told you, because it would be a great selling point to be able to say, “Hey listen, they were furnace brazing these that cost them so much per part, now they're inert fluxless brazing with induction and it cost X minus whatever per part.” That would be a great marketing thing.

DG: I guess it's probably worth mentioning here that eldec does all different types of induction, not just inert, atmosphere, fluxless brazing, right? You're doing all kinds of different types of stuff. We were just focusing in on that specific process.

If people want to get in touch with you, Greg, or just to check out eldec, where do they want to go?

GH: We can be reached through our website. eldec actually has two different websites. We have a website that is essentially a worldwide website. I think there's eight different languages on it that you can choose from. That is www.eldec.net. On that website you'll see a lot of product lines and applications.

But here, specifically in North America, we have developed a site called www.inductionheatingexperts.com. That site is more tailored to our market here in North America. On that site, you won't necessarily see as much of the heat treating, because as I mentioned earlier, our sister company EMAG handles that. If you're interested in that, their website is www.emag.com. Here in our office, our main phone number is 248-364-4750 and our general email address is info@eldec-usa.com. Me personally, you can reach me at my desk at 248-630-7756 and my email address is gholland@emag.com.

DG: I did have one other question and that is what other resources are offered by eldec?

eldec’s new online app, the Coil Design Assistant
Source: www.inductionheatingexperts.com

GH: I mentioned our websites. Both websites will show a list of our products. There is at least one product line that is on the North America site that is not on the other site, and that's one that we developed and specifically developed here in North America. That's called our MiniMICO .

But also on our North American site is a tool that we've developed this year called the Coil Design Assistant. That's our CDA. I believe you guys did a little feature on it not that long ago, but that is a feature where customers can go on our website and essentially find a variety of different coil types and they can put in what dimensions they think they want or need and then we get an email and we can essentially do an approval drawing and a quote for them right there off of the web.

DG: Basically, it's a web tool to help you design a coil.

Doug Glenn, Publisher, Heat Treat Today

Doug Glenn, Heat Treat Today publisher and Heat Treat Radio host.


To hear this episode and other Heat Treat Radio podcasts, please check out heattreattoday.com/media/heat-treat-radio

Heat Treat Radio #52: Fluxless, Inert Atmosphere, Induction Brazing with Greg Holland, eldec LLC Read More »

Heat Treat Radio #51: Spotlight on 40 Under 40 Leaders (Part 1 of 3)

In a special Heat Treat Radio series, 40 Under 40 winners from the class of 2020 respond with their stories and insights of their life and work in the heat treat industry. This episode features the stories of Luke Wright, Nathan Durham, and Alberto Cantú.

This episode in the series also features an update from a past alum; in this episode, Kyle Hummel of Contour Hardening  shares his journey over the last several years and how he has grown as a person in heat treat.

Below, you can listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button and read a few excerpts from this episode.

 



Luke Wright

Luke Wright
Senior Engineer
JTEKT North America Corporation / Koyo Bearings

“So, we had a void in the heat treating department. We had three new hires — 2 others including myself at the time. They kind of shuffled us around: one went to assembly and I got put in heat treat with one of the others. They figured heat treat was difficult enough for two green engineers. I kind of picked it up as I went along.

“I guess that’s kinda what I really like — sort of this black box science that everyone wants to talk about, and there’s so many things we have to just say, Well, I’m not really sure. We turn this knob and it tends to work better that way. But then, there’s also really detailed science and theory that kind of guides you and that gut feel, twist-that-knob practical application.”

“Something that I’ve been trying to do more lately in my job is to explain more about what I’m doing, what’s going on with the others around me — maintenance workers, furnace operators, or supervisors — instead of just keeping to myself or pushing them out of the way to just do the thing myself if they don’t understand: Doing a little more to work alongside people.”

 


Nathan Durham

Nathan Durham
Aftermarket Sales Manager
Ipsen

“As we near the end of 2020 and reflect on the many, many challenges that arose, I’m truly motivated by the diversity and resilience of our industry[…] We’ll persevere through this pandemic, and push forward into 2021.”

“During my tenure at Ipsen, I’ve realized how important it is to always remain flexible within a career and adapt to what your company and what your customer are asking you.”

“Thank you again, as I’m truly humbled to be a part, and associated with, such great company, and the future of our industry.”


Alberto Cantú

Alberto Cantú
VP Combustion, Control and Services
Nutec Bickley

“I started as an R&D manager. I had completed a PhD on the computation of fluid dynamics and used these tools to design new furnaces. But lately, I’ve been more involved in sales and business development.”

“On the one hand, the computation of power has been increasing — I’m going to say since the birth of computers, but lately more and more — but then the internet and the whole internet of things and Industry 4.0 coming together… You can do a lot of things with both the calculations and the ability to have the information in real time. I think many of these operating procedures that were mainly based on ‘rules of thumb’ and heuristics will change[…] to be based on machine learning…”

“I would suggest [for young heat treaters] to get involved in tradeshows, subscribe to newsletters, make sure you read all the news in the magazines available and in companies so that you get up-to-date in all things happening in the industry because, as I said, it’s vey exciting and I see a bright future.”


Kyle Hummel

Kyle Hummel
Chief Operating Officer
Contour Hardening

“Professionally, I’ve been honored to accept a promotion and am now responsible for overseeing our operations. And on top of that, I’m currently studying for my very last finals to get my MBA in which I’ll graduate May.”

“The heat treatment industry is such a broad field of processes and technologies that anyone can get really excited about. I also think that heat treating can offer the perfect balance of hands-on work experience as well as quality and process improvement that can keep you engaged for years as you continue to grow your career.”

“I’m personally excited to see how the heat treat industry adapts to the next five years as electric vehicles sales continue to rise in the US. I believe this will be an opportunity for heat treaters to start thinking about  how to broaden their service offerings and expanding into other industries as well.”

 


To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio so see all of the episodes.

Heat Treat Radio #51: Spotlight on 40 Under 40 Leaders (Part 1 of 3) Read More »

Heat Treat Radio #50: Justin Rydzewski and James Hawthorne on CQI-9 Rev.4 (Part 4 of 4) – Expert Advice

Welcome back to the show. Heat Treat Radio host, Doug Glenn, wraps up a four-part series on CQI-9 Revision 4 changes with Acument Global Technologies’ James Hawthorne and Controls Service Inc. Justin Rydzewski. In this final episode, both of these experts give their advice on how to navigate and comply with Rev 4.

To find the previous episodes in this series, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio.

Below, you can listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button or read the edited transcript.

 


 


The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.

Doug Glenn (DG):  We're here today with Justin Rydzewski who is the director of sales and marketing of Controls Service, Inc. in Livonia, Michigan and also with James Hawthorne, heat treat specialist at Acument Global Technologies.  Both of these gentlemen have been with us for two or three of the last three episodes that we put together.  James, was the committee chair, I believe that's the right title, for the Revision 4, and Justin, of course, was right alongside on the committee getting things done.  Gentlemen, first off, welcome back to Heat Treat Radio.

Justin Rydzewski (JR):  Glad to be here.

James Hawthorne (JH):  Thank you, Doug.  Glad to be here.

DG:  We've covered a lot of the major changes, a lot of the main points that people ought to know, on the first three episodes.  We want to wrap it up today by asking a couple of very practical questions, a couple of “opinion” questions, but, I think, also a couple of very practical questions on implementation, and things of that sort, of the new CQI-9 Rev 4.

Justin, if you don't mind, I'd like to start with you and address an issue that I think you and I touched on in the very first episode, and that was the difference between the CQI-9 standard and AM2750F, specifically, about the automotive industry.  Why doesn't it just adopt AMS2750F as opposed to having this separate CQI-9 standard?

Episode 1 of 3 of AMS2750 series

JR:  I think that both specifications are appropriate for their industries.  But, there are some significant differences between the two.  First and foremost, one is intended for aerospace and the other for automotive.  AMS2750F, as we've mentioned in a previous episode, is a pyrometry standard, whereas CQI-9 is a system assessment; it is a process-based approach to things, whereas AMS2750 is more equipment based.  You classify things by temperature tolerances, by the instrumentation type that you have, whereas requirements within CQI-9 are generally based on your type of process and specific to your process, in particular.

I would say that the most significant difference between the two documents is AMS2750 is part of the NADCAP program and requires accreditation and an auditing body, PRI, to come out and say, “Yep, you're good to go.  Here's your certificate.  We'll see you in a year”.  CQI-9 is intended to be a self-assessment.  It's intended for heat treaters to implement themselves to provide them with a process of managing their heat treat and that doesn't require somebody to come in and accredit them and hand them a certificate.

There is a big difference between the two; they are not equals.  There are similarities, especially in the pyrometry section.  At one point, AMS was heavily sited inside of CQI-9.  Since its removal, however, we've had success, and that success has been measurable; it's been significant.  I would image that the OEs have been rather happy with what it is that they have there in the document, especially in the 4th edition, and I think that the thought of going to an AMS2750 and abandoning CQI-9 is well outside the realm of plausible.

JH:  One thing I would add here is, if you read the headers for each section of the HTSA, section one is “Management Responsibility and Quality Planning”, section two is “Floor and Material Handling Responsibilities”, and section three is the equipment.  On the equipment side, you're going to get more into the pyrometry side of things- the metrology and the maintenance specifics to that equipment, as well.  So, the all-encompassing HTSA is a system that is a management system, or at least a system that you can develop a management system based behind, and ensure compliance.

DG:  For those who are just joining on this episode, HTSA, heat treat system assessment, is one of the main parts of the CQI standard.  Justin, I think your point is good.  James, I think, as well, the point is well taken.  CQI-9 is meant to be an internal tool, a continuous improvement tool that helps a company that is involved with heat treating to continually improve their process.  AMS2750F specifically, is pretty much exclusively a pyrometry certification program, where you've got to have somebody coming from the outside.  I remember, back in the day, when they were first starting one of the QS standards, they said, no longer are you going to have to comply or get qualified by this OE, or this prime, or this prime, now you can have one standard.  Has that been the case here?  Has it been effective in the automotive industry, CQI-9?

JH:  I think, 100%, Doug.  It's like IATF – all of the automotive industry has to be compliant to that.  Same thing with CQI-9.  It provides that commonality for all heat treaters in all the different processes that are employed at their facilities, or the multiple facilities that they may have.  For a company like ours, we have 8 companies in North America.  For the North American side of things that have heat treat furnaces in them, we have induction furnaces, we have carbonitriding furnaces, and we have stress relief furnaces.  So that commonality even helps us internally with our management system and how we take steps to provide that common approach and compliance to CQI-9.

[blockquote author="Justin Rydzewski" style="1"]The CQI-9 intent largely was that this is something that you can do yourself and implement yourself.  We'll provide you with the guidance and put it in simple terms and give you all the research you need to support this on your own.[/blockquote]

JR:  I think that also bodes well, up the ladder as well, for the OEs.  The more commonality that exists in the industry, the wider that, for lack of a better term, talent pool is.  The more people, the more sources that you can go to in order to have work done and have it what you expect it to be, from a quality standpoint.

I think one of the things that CQI-9 has done really well is they've made a concerted effort to make that document easier to understand and to simplify things down to just its bare bone necessities, whereas some of the other specifications that exist in industry can be lacking.  There is a real good reason why a lot of the work of some of those other pyrometry specifications out there are outsourced, because the expertise to adhere to those things and be confident that you're adhering to those things is possessed by an in-house team; they have to go outside.  The CQI-9 intent largely was that this is something that you can do yourself and implement yourself.  We'll provide you with the guidance and put it in simple terms and give you all the research you need to support this on your own.

Justin Rydzewski, James Hawthorne, and Doug Glenn (clockwise from the left) sat around the virtual screen to hash out a few final expert opinions on CQI-9.

DG:  I'm pretty sure, based on everything we've talked about, that you guys really like CQI-9.

JH:  100%!  I embrace it and our company embraces it.

DG:  So, I know you guys like it, you're the main cheerleaders.  What is your perception about companies outside of yourself?  Has it, in fact, been embraced, or has it kind of been “Heisman trophied”, the stiff arm – “We'll embrace you with one extended arm”.

JH:  If I may, I will say that it's been embraced across the industry through all heat treaters.  I think anywhere that anybody deemed it to be a burden, I think with the changes to the format, the added clarity, the improvements to the document, the knowledge base that's now been updated in the glossary, it is all going to help those guys cross any bridge that they were struggling with and make it better for them.

I believe we touched on a little bit in one of the past episodes, or maybe it was when Justin and I were talking about this offline, but one of our customers, who is a non-automotive customer, embraces CQI-9 and our systems and our approach to our heat treat.  That is a huge step because that particular company has a lot of internal specification as it pertains to heat treat, but CQI-9 is either equal to or exceeds what their expectation is.  It makes it easy for them to embrace it.  That was one of the things that was brought up in the roll-out presentation we did through AIAT – one of the other industries had mentioned they were following it.

DG:  It sounds like, overall, it has been fairly well embraced and this Rev 4 is going to make it even easier to cuddle up with a cup of hot cocoa and feel comfortable with it.

JR:  Generally speaking, in my travels, I have two categories of people that I come across.  You have the sort that is looking to embrace it.  They recognize that it's a “have to do” and they just want to know what the rules are.  They want to make sure that they understand what the rules are and that they make sense.  Maybe there is a point or two that they take exception to about, not fully understanding what the intent is of it, but, for the most part, by and large, they want to adhere to the requirements.  They recognize that they need to.

The other category includes those who fight anything that they're asked to do, no matter what it is.  “No, I don't want to do that.  We've been doing it this way forever.  Convince me, show me, that I'm doing it wrong.  I do some sort of subsequent testing and it always come out fine.  I've never had any complaints.  Why do I have to go do this?”  While that group is definitely the minority, I can tell you that that group, almost 100% of those people are going to be those types that you find more issues with than any other.  That's because they fight it and they try to find ways to circumvent things.  That's a real slippery slope there.

I think CQI-9 does a real good job at trying to keep things in its lane and recognize that if there's something that we're asking the heat treater to do, that that requirement needs to provide value on some level, or it needs to mitigate risk on some level, and a meaningful one at that.

You asked, “Do I like CQI-9?”  I like AMS2750 too.  There are some things in AMS2750 I like better than what we did in CQI-9.  Talking from experience of having to write some of the requirements in the document, and how difficult that can be to say what it is you want to say but in a manner that makes sense outside of your own brain, it's difficult.  I think AMS states some things very, very well.  I like their thermocouple calibration certificate requirements better than ours; I think they're more detailed.  But I think both work really well, and embracing it sometimes just requires a bit of an education or an understanding of the intent side of things, the purpose side of things.

DG:  When was CQI-9 Rev 4 released?

JR:  The last week of June.

DG:  It's been going on for months now.  How about timing?  I would imagine that a lot of people that are listening to this probably know that they need to comply with certain aspects of CQI-9.  What is the timing for them?  When do they need to have all their ducks in order?

JH:  During the roll out presentation, the OEMs made a joint statement.  We did that roll out presentation in September, and they essentially said that the time between the June release and that (roll-out) presentation was the grace period.  When the 3rd edition expired, you have to do 4th edition assessment and they will no longer accept 3rd edition assessments at that point.  So, whenever your expiration is, you shall do it to the 4th edition.

JR:  The 3rd edition is officially obsolete.

DG:  So if you're doing another assessment, it's going to be a Rev 4 assessment.  Are there any other timing issues that people need to be aware of?

JR:  That should pretty much cover everything.  If you're outsourcing an element of your service or of a material, you should be specifying adherence or conformance to the 4th edition at this point.

DG:  So, James, I want to address this next question to you, if you don't mind.  I know you said in your organization, you've got how many North American locations?

JH:  8 plants in North America.

DG:  OK, 8 plants.  And you've, obviously, rolled out Rev 4.  How did you handle the transition?  How did it go?  What was complicated and difficult, and how did you address it?

JH:  For me, I think it's a little easier, because I was in the room while we were writing the 4th edition.  The heat treat systems for all of our locations, I wrote.  So, I have a very unfair advantage.  But, that being said, even knowing and being as intimate as I am with our own system and the 4th edition of CQI-9, we have made a concerted effort to slow down the process of doing the heat treat system assessment and slow down the process of doing the job audit and doing the process tables to ensure that we are capturing everything.

We've made this statement many times, whether it was here with you or if it was through our roll-out presentation, it is essential to read this document.  It is essential to understand what's happening in it.  If it takes just a little bit of extra time to read a little bit further to do the checks and balances, pop into the glossary, just to make sure that you are answering the questions as compliant as you possibly can, is the most important thing.

A wise man told me once, Compliance is a circle and if you're just outside the circle, all I want you to do is get you just inside the circle.  And next year I'm going to tighten the circle a little bit and if you're still sitting outside, we're going to move you inside.  You don't have to hit a bullseye every time, but you have to be inside the compliance circle.  So, if you understand that, and if you manage it that way, it's going to make it easy and more effective.  Then, you can stick to the intent of the document, and the intent of the document is within the acronym itself of CQI-9: it's continuous quality improvement.  Never take your foot off the pedal.

Source: Heat Treat Today

DG:  Right.  It never ends.  Justin, how about you?  Same question.  I know you're going in through your company into a variety of other companies who are trying to comply.  What are you seeing, from their perspective, as far as the difficulty?  How are they handling it?

JR:  I think the most difficult aspect of things, I guess, is probably one of the most obvious: implementation.  You've been doing it one way for the last 8-9 years and now we're going to need to implement something new.  And when do you want to implement something new?  It's really nice when you work for an organization that has process specifications and certain test specifications very well defined, because then you can hold onto them and say, “Here are the things that we were doing,” and you can go through them and see where things need to be different.

Where they're less defined, or they're defined in some manner that is not on the forefront of things – like I define things in a quote or in a purchase order – those become difficult. There could be elements of implementing something too soon, and now, all of a sudden, I violate something that they've done internally, or sometimes if they had it stated internally for a requirement.

For us, the most difficult thing has been the implementation side of things.  It's meant a lot of conversations and trying to determine what this is going to look like, what things we are going to need to do differently, what things we want to check on, and the finally to, for lack of a better word, “coach” my customer along.  Here are things you need to consider, here are things you might need to do differently, here's how I would state it for the new edition for making revisions.  But to the horse that has been thoroughly well beaten, you have to read the document.

The CQI-9 audio book, coming soon, we'll have that on tape for you.  Whether you're driving to work or putting your kids to sleep, it will work either way.

DG:  Last question for you guys.  For a company who's wanting to become CQI-9 compliant, what are some of those must do's and what are some of the practical advice you've got for them as they start down that path?

JH:  If, I may, I think the first and most important thing there is to evaluate the talent that you have on site.  Who is your in-house expert?  Who is the guy that most fits what you need to be the driver of those next steps?  As long as you have that, and that guy understands your system, then the journey can begin and I think your process is more linear with less hills and valleys.  You start to win, and you start to win with less drop-off, and that's what you want to do.  First and foremost, have the right guy in place.

[blockquote author="James Hawthorne" style="1"]First and foremost, have the right guy in place. [/blockquote]

DG:  So, in your estimation, James, you're saying it's a personnel issue.  Right away, make sure you do a good assessment and get the right guy in the spot to oversee the process.

JH:  Right.  You don't want to be a commercial heat treater and you just hired a quality manager from a widget factory to come be the champion of your heat treat.  You want him to be a heat treater.  You want to have a heat treater in place that knows his stuff.

DG:  Right.  And who has an attention to detail, I'm sure.

JH:  I think it's important to the extent of what Justin was just talking about is, when that person talks to his suppliers, his service providers, you want to have somebody that has some wherewithal and understanding in that field so when that communication does take place, and you have folks like Justin and others in his field, trying to help educate the heat treater on what it takes to be compliant with, whether it's reporting, whether it's through the process or whatever, having that understanding is going to make even the service provider’s job easier.

JR:  I think that organizations that struggled with the 3rd edition are probably going to continue to struggle with the 4th edition.  If you're comfortable with the 3rd edition and you're doing well with the 3rd edition, the 4th edition is going to be relatively easy to adapt to and to implement.  Like with any math story problem, you've got to write down what it is you know.  So you go through the document itself, you start making notes on things, you start citing where things might need to be different, you start red flagging things, you review what you have, may do a Ctrl + F for any mention of 3rd edition and replace with 4th edition, or something simple like that. It is what you have created and try to continue on with the successes you had for the 3rd edition into that 4th one.  If you've struggled with the 3rd edition, the likelihood that you're going to struggle with the 4th is also pretty great.  It is likely that the document isn't the issue, the issue is likely a lack of awareness.

It cannot go understated how valuable it is to invest in training, especially if you're bringing some new guy on to champion the effort, or if you've got a team that's eager and hungry and looking to prove their worth – get them trained.  It's readily available.  Our organization offers it, the AIG offers training on the HTSA side of things; there are plenty of organizations out there that will offer this training.  The benefits to working with a high-end service provider in many of these regards, is that they'll help you through the process as part of their service offering.  That's how the true value of a good service provider can be measured is in these sorts of situations.  I'd lean on your experts.  Invest in your staff.  Get the training to get everyone up to speed.

Again, if you fought it in the 3rd, and your plan is to fight it on the 4th, it's going to be an unenjoyable road and you might need to figure out ways to embrace what it is you know and acknowledge what it is you don't, and then fill those gaps in so that you can get to where you need to go.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Doug Glenn, Publisher, Heat Treat Today

Doug Glenn, Heat Treat Today publisher and Heat Treat Radio host.


To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio.

Heat Treat Radio #50: Justin Rydzewski and James Hawthorne on CQI-9 Rev.4 (Part 4 of 4) – Expert Advice Read More »

Heat Treat Radio #49: Metal Hardening 101 with Mark Hemsath, Part 1 of 3

Heat Treat Radio host Doug Glenn and Mark Hemsath, talk about hardening basics. What is it, why does it matter, and how do we do it? This is a great primer episode to kick off our three-part series with Mark. Listen and learn!

Mark was formerly the vice president of Super IQ and Nitriding at SECO/WARWICK, and is now the vice president of Sales - Americas for Nitrex Heat Treating Services.

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):  Mark, I want to welcome you to Heat Treat Radio.  Welcome!

Mark Hemsath (MH):  Thank you, Doug.  It's nice to be with you today and thanks for having me on the show to talk about this interesting subject.  I'm not quite sure if I'm an expert on it, but we will certainly try to talk about it.

DG:  I'm sure you know more than most of us – that's why you're here!  First of all, as I mentioned, you are the VP of Super IQ, IQ being integral quench, not necessarily intelligence quotient – although, you are a smart guy.  You are the VP of Super IQ and nitriding for SECO/VACUUM.  Both of those are processes and both of those are dealing with hardening.  Tell us a little bit of your background and then we'll jump into the topic of hardness of metals.

MH:  I'm not a metallurgist.  I did take metallurgy at college and I've been living it most of my life, but I didn't train to be a metallurgist.  Instead, I got involved in the furnace business, and being involved with furnaces you have to do something with those furnaces.  Typically, those furnaces allow you to do different things, like soften and harden metals.  My background is that for many years, I worked with my father helping to design furnaces for the industry and we developed different furnaces.  Some furnaces were for annealing, some for tempering, some vacuum processes, you name it.  I joined SECO/WARWICK a number of years ago and I spent quite a bit of my early days in ion nitriding and SECO/WARWICK was involved with gas nitriding. That was of extreme interest to me.  I took a liking to that and decided to become a subject expert on nitriding.  Now, I've been asked to also get involved with our carburizing product, which is breaking into the market – we call it Super IQ.  That is obviously carburizing as a surface hardening process.  Not to mention, we also do through hardening in those furnaces, and we can go into some of those details a little bit more here today.

DG:  For people who might not know, when we talk about hardness, we're talking about the hardness of a metal.  Most people would think, all metal is hard. I mean, that's one of the characteristics of metal, but if you wouldn't mind, give us the “hardness 101” class: What is it and why is it important when you talk about hardness for metals?

MH:  I think the most important thing is that with metals, you're trying to get certain features that allow it not to wear over time.  At the same time, you want the part to last.  You don't want it to break, you don't want it to chip, you don't want it to seize up, so there are a lot of different things you can do with the parts to give them certain wear characteristics and hardness.  There are other things – anti-friction, etc. – that you can do with surface finishes, such as with nitriding, which offer hardness to the part, but in a slightly different way than you might think, just on basic hardenbility.  But, whatever we're talking about, we're trying to prevent parts from wearing, and that's typically why you try to harden the parts.

DG:  How do we measure hardness, or what are the units that we typically measure?

MH:  You have different scales out there, depending upon what you're trying to measure.  If you're just trying to measure the surface, you might go with the file hardness or you might go with a test where you don't have such a heavy hardness on there.  There are different Brinell hardnesses: You've got the HRC, the HRB, and different scales out there.  You've got the Vickers hardness, and all different types of equipment designed to very accurately measure the hardness of a part and also to try to figure out how that hardness is changing throughout the material.

Typically, in most materials and in the processes that you're doing, because you have some thickness of material and a lot of it is related to both the quench rates etc., you're going to get hardness that varies throughout the part.  So, they have come up with different ways of measuring that and there are a number of different scales out there.  You can look that up and decide.  Some people like to use one over the other, but typically, they are all designed to do the same thing: try to get an accurate reading of what the hardness is.

DG:  I've heard the more common ones, I think you've mentioned them: Rockwell is a hardness measurement, Vickers is a hardness measurement, and Brinell is a hardness measurement.  So, those are the scales that are used.  We're not going to get into how those tests are done and things of that sort, but we certainly could at some point in time.

[blocktext align="right"]“I think the most important thing is that with metals, you're trying to get certain features that allow it not to wear over time.  At the same time, you want the part to last.”[/blocktext]

MH:  I'm not an expert on doing the tests.  I've seen them done many times, but there are guys that are really good at that.  Same with microstructures, right?  Looking at that and understanding how things change within the steel and seeing it under different magnification, gives the scientists some really good knowledge about what's going on within the steel.

DG:  Again, “hardness 101”:  A person often hears, when dealing with metals and hardness, about surface hardness or through hardness.  Can you tell us about those things?   What's the difference?  Why is that important?

MH:  A part that you make, in a lot of instances, you want it to be as hard as possible for wear characteristics, but at the same time you don't want the part to fail because the core properties are too hard and can be brittle.  Typically, what you have is people trying to impart certain types of features onto the surface and still retain the so-called core properties of that material.  Obviously, you heat it up to austenitic temperatures and you quench it and you try to transform as much of that steel as possible to martensite, and then you try to temper it back.

A number of things that you're doing there are going to change the properties of the steel.  That's why people will use different tempering temperatures to get different core properties.  They'll use different surface treatments, whether carburizing (which will give you a higher surface hardness by driving more carbon into the surface) or induction hardening, in which you're heating up just the outer part of the steel and then quenching the outer part.  Obviously, you can only go so deep because you're quenching it from the outside, but that will give you almost a double type of feature within the material.  You're starting out with the core properties that you want – a certain hardness, a certain ductility, and a certain capability to function, let's say, a shaft – and then you want to give it some hardness.  If you have the right steel, you can harden that just by taking it up to temperature with induction heating or with flame heating and then quickly quenching it to get the properties that you want on that outer.

DG:  There are some properties in there that I want to make sure our listeners understand.  You mentioned the idea of hardness and ductility.  Those two things tend to be on opposite ends.  I know there are much more technical descriptions of this, but the harder something is, the more brittle it tends to be, and when it's brittle, it takes less to crack it or break it.  Whereas if it's ductile, it's softer, it can take more of an impact without breaking.  For example, let's just use a gear: On the gear teeth, on the outer edge of the gear, you want that to be very hard so there's good wear, but you don't want it to crack so you keep the inside of that gear, (that's away from the surface side of the gear), soft.  Yes?

MH:  Yes.  And there is a lot that goes into gear design.  You don't want high impacts, obviously, you want the teeth to mesh together.  There are people that induction harden gear teeth, there are people that carburize gear teeth and there are people that nitride gear teeth.  They're all trying to do something on the teeth, and even though you're doing something on the teeth, you still have to also impart certain properties to the core part of the gear itself to make sure that nothing breaks or falls apart on the gear, the main core part of the gear itself.

(Source: Inductotherm)

DG:  You did also mention the fact that there are some steels that are more easily hardenable than other steels.  I've heard there are high hardenability steels and there are low hardenability steels.  What's the difference?

MH:  In general, iron is an element that is common to all steels.  Now, there is tremendous science that has happened over the last decades on putting different alloying elements into the steels, whether it's chromium or titanium or vanadium or you can name all the different ones.  Some of them are called micro alloy and some of them are more main alloys, but they all provide different types of properties to that alloy steel which then gives that steel certain characteristics.  There are more steels created today than I could ever mention.  You can buy huge books on that from ASM and get all of the different properties of the steels.  Tool steels have quite a few alloying elements in them, and they have a very high hardenability.  They're also more expensive, so people are not going to want to use expensive steels with all of those expensive alloying elements for basic automotive transmissions, or what have you; it just gets too expensive.

I should also say that carbon makes up a big part of that, too.  The carbon in the steel is, obviously, why we call it carburizing because it will put hardness into it.  But we also have what we call low carbon steels, medium carbon steels and high carbon steels.  Then you start throwing in the alloying elements with that and you get all kinds of variations.

DG:  So, typically, a high carbon steel is going to be much more easily hardened because it's got more carbon in it to start with and you don't necessarily have to add carbon into it during the heat treating process.

MH:  Right.  But when you heat and quench those parts, they also have different properties, as well.

DG:  Is it only steels that can be hardened?

MH:  I'm not an expert on it, but there are other types.  There are some stainless steels – martensitic stainless steels – and there are different age hardening steels… which are still steels.  There is aluminum, which has different properties depending upon what other elements they put in that; they can do some different types of hardening on those.  Titanium by itself is a fairly hard metal, etc.  Most of the people that we deal with, or whom we're talking about, are the people who are using steels to start with, a lot of times fairly inexpensive steels.  But, we also, in vacuum furnaces, do very high-end steels, such as tool steels, like H13 air hardenable tool steels, etc.

DG:  Let's jump back to steels.  What are the typical heat treatment processes that enhance hardness, that increase the hardness?

Microstructure of the carburized steel.
Source: Surface Hardening Vs. Surface Embrittlement in Carburizing of Porous Steels - Scientific Figure on ResearchGate. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Microstructure-of-the-carburized-steel_fig2_326653574 [accessed 3 Mar, 2021]
MH:  First of all, we have carburizing.  As we spoke before, when you have a steel and you impart carbon into that steel, it tends to make it harder.  What carburizing does, is it focuses that effort of putting carbon only into the surface.  This means that you can have different core properties of that steel versus the outer properties.  Then you can drive that carbon fairly deep into the surface, if you want.  Now, deep means something like 2 mm, and above that are starting to get fairly deep cases.  2 millimeters is .079 inches.  You do this by putting the part, at austenizing temperatures, into an atmosphere which is rich in carbon.DG:  Let's stop here to define.  Again, this is a non-technical definition of austenizing.  To me, when I think of an austenizing temperature, that means even though that part is still “solid”, the fact of the matter is, that piece of metal is kind of in solution; things are moving around inside.MH:  You've changed the structure.  Then, when you quench it, you're trying to cool it very quickly so that you can get different structures out of that steel.We're talking here surface hardening or surface engineering.  There are quite a few, actually.  Some of the more common, obviously, are the ones we talked about here.  There are basically four very common ones:  carburizing, nitriding, carbonitriding, and nitrocarburizing.  They are different.  (Although, in Europe, sometimes they reverse those names a little bit between carbonitriding and nitrocarburizing.)  I'll explain to you what, I believe, those are and why we call them that.

Carburizing is just as I was saying: driving carbon into the surface of the steel.  It gets a very high hardness in the steel, depending upon what type of steel you have.  It's typically done with lower carbon steels so that you can put the carbon into the surface.  That's why we do it, because it's a lower carbon steel.

Nitriding is not an austenitic process; it is a lower temperature process.  It's called a ferritic process.  What that means is you don't go into the phase transformation where you have to go and quench the steel to get those properties.  You're not going to get much in the way of dimensional shift or growth that you would get from the austenizing steel, and that's very beneficial.  By driving nitrogen into the surface, you get a very high hardness.  Now, you also need to have things in that surface of the steel other than just iron.  You have different alloying elements which combine very easily with nitrogen, such as chromium, titanium, aluminum, vanadium, and some of those other things which will combine with the nitrogen, which either comes from an excited nitrogen atom via ion nitriding or comes from the disassociation of ammonia from gas nitriding where the nitrogen then transports itself into the steel surface and making those hard items.

[blocktext align="left"] “Nitriding is not an austenitic process; it is a lower temperature process.  It's called a ferritic process.  What that means is you don't go into the phase transformation where you have to go and quench the steel to get those properties.”[/blocktext]

In carbonitriding, it's identical to carburizing except you throw some ammonia in there.  This is typically done at a lower temperature because ammonia breaks down very quickly at high temperature, so you're trying to stay right at the lower edge of that.  You're throwing ammonia in there because the nitrogen will impart a very hard surface along with the carbon.  It doesn't go in as deep but it's usually done as a 'down and dirty' very hard surface on a part, typically, a fairly inexpensive part.

Nitrocarburizing is like nitriding, but the focus is on the white layer, on the compound zone, which is a very hard layer of iron nitrides and iron nitrogen carbides.  You get a very hard layer.  They call it the compound zone because you have both a gamma prime zone, which is one element, and you have an epsilon zone, and those have very unique properties for the surface of the steel.

DG:  Those are the main carburizing processes – carburizing, nitriding, carbonitriding, and nitrocarburizing.  We'll dig deeper into those in our next episode, and also cover the processes, perhaps the types of equipment that those processes are done in, just for a little bit more education.  Then, we’ll do a third episode where we'll talk about why we're hearing more recently about nitriding, low pressure carburizing, and single piece flow – and perhaps something that is near and dear to your heart, Mark, and that is some hybrid systems of a batch interval quench, which your company happens to call the Super IQ. Thanks for being here today.

Doug Glenn, Publisher, Heat Treat Today

Doug Glenn, Heat Treat Today publisher and Heat Treat Radio host.


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 Treat Radio #49: Metal Hardening 101 with Mark Hemsath, Part 1 of 3 Read More »

Heat Treat Radio #48: The World of Ferritic Nitrocarburizing with Thomas Wingens

Heat Treat Radio host, Doug Glenn, talks with Thomas Wingenspresident of WINGENS LLC – International Industry Consultancy, about the growing popularity of ferritic nitrocarburizing (FNC) and whom this process would benefit most. Listen and learn all about FNC and how it might be a help to your production process.

To find the previous episodes in this series, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio.

Below, you can listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button or read the edited transcript.

 

 



The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.

Doug Glenn (DG):  We want to welcome Mr. Thomas Wingens who is from WINGENS LLC – International Industry Consultancy.  Thomas is no stranger to Heat Treat Radio.  Thomas, you’ve been here before and, in fact, you’ve got one of the more popular  Heat Treat Radio (as far as downloads).  It’s one of the ones we did several years ago, actually, on megatrends in the heat treat industry.  But, anyhow, Thomas, welcome back to Heat Treat Radio.

Thomas Wingens (TW):  Thankful to be back, Doug.

DG:  If you don’t mind, Thomas, let’s start off very briefly and give the listeners a brief idea of your history and your current activities in the heat treat industry.

TW:  My name is Thomas Wingens.  I am an independent consultant to the heat treat industry for 10 years now.  I have been in the heat treat industry for over 30 years.  As a matter of fact, my parents actually had a heat treat shop and I was born and raised above the shop.  We had various heat treat processes in our shop.  Vacuum heat treating we started in the early ’70s, but also atmosphere heat treating and nitriding.

Nitriding – I am also familiar with this, now for over 30 years.  I work with different companies and manufacturers on the one hand, but also other commercial heat treat shops (like Bodycote and Ipsen).  I am a metallurgist by trade.  I studied material science.

Today, I live in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania with my family (not far away from you, Doug), and we really enjoy it here.

DG:  It’s very obvious you’ve got heat treat in your blood.  You were born and raised in Germany, but you’ve been here in the States for quite a few years now.  You’re well acquainted, and I think this is important, with not only the European technology that we’re going to talk about today – which is ferritic nitrocarburizing – but you’re also familiar with the U.S. market.  It gives you a good “in” in both of those markets and so a good perspective to share with our listeners.

This episode is basically going to just cover FNC, ferritic nitrocarburizing.  We want to start at the basic level and work down through a few questions for anyone interested in what it is, how to do it, and that type of thing.  If you don’t mind, FNC 101.

What is ferritic nitrocarburizing?

TW:  It is aligned with carburizing and nitriding into fusion treatment.  It is thermal process diffusion, not a coating.  As it is ferritic, it means it is not austenitic.  So, we’re not heating parts as high as we would do with carburizing or carbonitriding, which is more the range of 950 Celsius; nitriding in general is operated in a temperature range of 500 Celsius range and ferritic nitrocarburizing is in the 560 – 590 Celsius range.  We are not austenitic, and that makes a huge difference, especially when it comes to distortion.  We are treating with FNC parts which are ready to build in.  It is the final step, very often.  That is a huge difference.  We can do this because we do not experience any distortion.

FNC Image
Source: Paulo

DG:  So, you’re doing it at a lower temperature range, we don’t have to worry about distortion and things of that sort, and it is, more or less, the final step.

TW:  It is.  Like nitriding, the nitriding is taking place in the 500 – 540 Celsius, and usually the nitriding takes longer; it is up to 90 hours very often, so deep case nitriding is very popular for some applications.  The rise and the popularity of FNC is that we can achieve results very fast.  First of all, we are at elevated temperature versus nitriding as we are operating at 580 – 590 degrees Celsius.

But there is also the carbon content.  The additional carbon, in conjunction with the nitrogen, also accelerates the diffusion.  We are achieving faster diffusion layers with FNC than with nitriding.  So, shorter cycle times means lower costs and faster turnaround.  Instead of having 24 or 90 hours cycle times, we often have 4-6 hours.

DG:  Let’s do the comparisons again of the processes.  You’ve got nitriding which is probably the lowest temperature process, but it’s a much longer cycle.  If we’re moving up in temperature, probably ferritic nitrocarburizing would be next.  It’s going to be a much shorter cycle because you’ve got the addition of carbon as well, which is helping diffusion into the metals.  Then you’ve got nitrocarburizing or carburizing, both at much higher temperatures.  In fact, when you get to carburizing, you need to worry about distortion, I would assume, correct?

TW:  Exactly.  That makes a big difference because it is not the final step after carburizing or carbonitriding which is taking place at 950 degrees Celsius, or, if you go into a vacuum furnace with LPC, you can go even higher (up to 1000 Celsius).  Nevertheless, you’re in the austenitic field.  When your part is cooler when being quenched, you transform from austenitic to martensitic, and then you get distortion associated with quenching and the ensuing transformation.  That means you need to grind the parts to have finished parts.  That’s not the case with nitriding or nitrocarburizing or FNC.

DG:  As an example, can you list off some parts that typically go under FNC?  What are people typically ferritic nitrocarburizing? What types of parts?

TW:  Due to the fact that we have a couple of micron layer only, (that means you don’t have huge parts, for the most part), you are doing .3mm up to 3 or 6mm for deep case for windmill gears.  With the size of the part, usually the surface treatment layer is growing as well, so it really depends on the wear.

Nitriding certainly can be applied on large parts and it is done on very large parts, meaning 7 meter long extrusion screws and such; but it is because of the wear.  The work technique you have on a very unique surface layer with nitriding and nitrocarburizing is formed from friction.  When you have chemical wear, when you have fatigue wear, you get a couple of things.  One of them is you have compressive stresses that are holding up to some degree of fatigue, and then you have, of course, a high surface hardness of 1200 vickers.  You have a very high surface hardness and then if you have galling or pitting where metal on metal is wearing.  The nitriding layer is very supportive here.  But also, the chemical resistance is a very big factor.

A big part of the success of FNC is the combination with post oxidation.  That is a big part because the combination of ferritic nitrocarburizing with post oxidation leads not only to a mechanical strong surface with compressive stresses, it also has a very high corrosion resistance.  That combination is a wonder combination for several automotive parts.  A lot of components have been hard chrome plated in the past.  So you have several ball pivots, ball joints, in the car.  When you have an older car with chrome plated ball pivots, you maybe have heard an itchy noise, when the car makes a noise when you go over a curb or when you go up and down.  That is very often due to the fact that these ball joint pivots are corroded and were chrome plated.  That is a huge application.  That became the standard in the automotive industry.  Every ball joint is now FNC and post oxidized.

The other application that you see a lot is if you have a pneumatic trunk lift piston.  The piston, you remember, has been hard chrome plated so that you have the chrome finish.  You will see in a newer car, in the front hood, you have a gas piston that is FNC treated and post oxidized.  Everything that is exposed to corrosion, which are so many parts on the automobile, even the light building of the body.  This is something to mention.

[blockquote author=”Thomas Wingens, WINGENS LLC – International Industry Consultancy” style=”1″]A big part of the success of FNC is the combination with post oxidation. That is a big part because the combination of ferritic nitrocarburizing with post oxidation leads not only to a mechanical strong surface with compressive stresses, it also has a very high corrosion resistance. [/blockquote]

All of these components I’m mentioning here are body parts predominantly and have nothing to do with electrification or with internal combustion drive trains.  They are not impacted by that, so we will not see any change here in the future.  A lot of under body components, where there is stone chipping and all the corrosion, people are tending to use FNC and black oxide because they can make it on thinner sheet metal part with compressive stresses so they have higher strength built in and they have the corrosion protection on top of it.  It’s a good combination.  And, of course, it’s virtually distortion free.  You may see that on some parts, due to very high compressive stresses, there is a buildup on the corners, but other than that, it is virtually distortion free and that’s a big, big plus of FNC.

DG:  That explains why it is growing in popularity.  I think that’s one thing you and I talked about earlier; there seems to be within the last, I don’t know, five years for sure, it seems like you’re hearing a lot more about FNC than you used to hear about.  Nitriding is still popular and carburizing is still popular, but you’re hearing a lot more about FNC, primarily because of the things you said.  Are there any other reasons, or is that primarily it?  Cost savings and good qualities.

TW:  If you look back, Doug, in the early days, in the beginning of the early nineties, I was running our nitriding department in our heat treat shop, and I had this little shaker bottle where it can determine the disassociation of ammonia and that determined the nitrogen potential.  The outcome was mediocre, to tell you the truth.  We did not clean the parts, we just put ammonia on it, and we had no way of controlling it other than the time and the temperature, so the outcome was a big variation. That’s why it was limited.  You could not find anything in the aerospace industry.  Nitriding was not accepted in aerospace at all.  Even in the automotive industry in the nineties, you did not find anything nitrided.  It was only used on tooling applications, and such.

But with the controls you have today, with the probes and sensors, you can determine everything, and you can see exactly what’s going on.  That has been a big factor.  There is the reproducibility of the layer you achieve and that is only possible with the good controls that you have and a better understanding of the process.

And, it is very important to mention, the cleaning of the surface.  There is no other heat treat process which benefits from good cleaning than nitriding and nitrocarburizing or FNC.  That makes a huge difference because you’re operating at a lower temperature and you don’t necessarily get rid of all the impurities and the ammonia gas, which, speaking of the process, really relies on the surface cracking of the material to dissociate in.  We have seen a huge impact if parts are not cleaned well on the different surface layers of FNC where we have missed the wide layer in total and such, so that is a big difference.

DG:  And the cleaning, I assume, besides just particles, I assume we’re talking about removal of grease and chemicals and things of that sort so that there can be good diffusion.

TW:  Exactly.  The surface has to be active.  The chips and the dirt to remove, that’s the easy part, but you have, sometimes, salts and residue from cutting and forming, especially the forming agents, sulfur phosphate, which are very hard to remove, especially for parts that are often FNC treated, like deep drawn parts or cheap metal components that are cut and there we see a big difference if they’re not cleaned well.

DG:  Run our listeners through a typical FNC process.  How does it happen?

TW:  I think it’s important to mention, as we haven’t done it yet, that we have three different processes.  We have salt bath nitriding or nitrocarburizing, gas, and plasma.  Each process has pros and cons.

FNC Image
Source: Bluewater Thermal Solutions website

The salt, there is a [cleaning] process or…QPQ, there are a lot of names out there for salt bath nitrocarburizing.  It is wonderful in that you just dunk it in, it’s quick.  The problem is the cyanide salts.  You have to carry it over, you have to clean it, you have to appropriately handle it, store it, and not everyone likes to do that.  Other than that, you have wonderful mechanical results with salt bath nitrocarburizing.

And then there is the plasma process.  The plasma is excellent for certain geometries, not so much for bulk.  You can place the parts in the furnace; it’s wonderfully clean and environmentally friendly.  Everything is good.  The problem is twofold: it is hard with bulk loads, it’s not as flexible on various parts and the other is with the post-oxidation, you cannot do it with plasma because it technically doesn’t work, so you need the… of gas nitriding in the plasma furnace to have the oxidizing part of the process, if you wish to go that route.

Having that said, the most widely accepted process is gas nitriding and gas nitrocarburizing.  Everyone knows that in pit furnaces this is one of the arrangements.  You put the parts in the furnace either vertically pit or modern now love horizontal arrangements, so if there is a loader you just have a batch.  Then you either purge with nitrogen gas or with a newer equipment that have a vacuum pump, so they have a vacuum purge system and instead of flushing with a lot of gas that draw a vacuum, they heat up the load and the convection to 580–590 degrees Celsius.  That can be done with so called “pre-oxidation process.”

Some people, especially if you have higher alloy chrome 4140 – “chrome alloyed” steels – they’re better to nitride if they are pre-oxidized on the way up.  Other than that, you would nitrocarburize ammonia gas, when you do gas nitriding, in conjunction with either endogas or CO2 gas.  Both, in combination, over a cycle time of 1 hour to 4 hours, soaking time and process time, and then you cool down with gas.  Not with the ammonia.  A lot of people make that mistake.  They heat up with ammonia or maybe even cool down with ammonia, but that is not correct.  Depending on, of course, what you’re trying to achieve, the best way is to flush it out because you have different disassociation processes going onto the surface and you have whatsoever surface combination nitrides if you don’t do it properly.

DG:  Are we gas cooling with nitrogen then?

TW:  You’re better off cooling with nitrogen.  Or you go interrupted cooling and then you oxidize on your way down, then you have this so called post oxidation.  You cool down to 300 – 350 C, and you have an FEO to layer which is dense, which is important.  You don’t want to have a flaky one or rough one, you want to have a dense oxidized layer as a surface and then you continue to cool.  That is basically the recipe of FNC.

DG:  I didn’t ask you before, and I should ask you: metals with which you can nitride or FNC, are they basically all steels?  Are there some steels you can’t do it with?  How about aluminum?  Titanium?  What can you do FNC with and what can’t you do it with?

TW:  I would say that nitriding is applied to a much broader spectrum of steels and even other alloys, let’s say.  People even do titanium and nickel alloys and try to put in nitrogen surface, calling it nitriding.  That is much broader.  FNC with nitrocarburizing is typically done with low carbon steels or carbon steels rather than high alloy steels.  That is why we have sheet metal parts very often.  So, low carbon or plain carbon steels.

DG:  And that’s maybe another reason, Thomas, why it’s become a more favorable process, right?  You can get some of the mechanical properties out with less expensive materials.  Is that safe to say?

TW:  Yes, that can be part of it.  But you should have a pre-hardened material, that’s important.  You need some carbon content in to have some hardness which sustains the high hardness of the surface.  It’s all prehard metals, for the most part.  Not necessary, but it certainly helps if you have some strength in the sub-strength which is supporting the hard layer.  It truly depends on your application.  But, you’re right: you can save on the materials to some degree and still get the mechanical properties that you’re looking for, especially in combination with the carbon.

DG:  Two final questions that maybe will help some of our listeners who are thinking about moving into the FNC direction.  The first question is, Who are the companies, and I know we can’t be exhaustive here, but who are some of the companies that actually manufacture this type of equipment that they could speak to?  And secondly, What are some of the things that companies ought to be asking themselves before they decide to go down the FNC rabbit trail, if you will?

So, first a list of companies if you have them.  We’ll try to be more exhaustive in our transcript of this.  If we miss any here, we’ll list them in the transcript.  But if you could rattle off a few that you’re comfortable with.

TW: There are the plasma people, that is RÜBIG GmbH & Co KG and Eltropuls and PlaTeG.  On the salt side, you have HEF Group, Degussa, and Kolene.  On the gas nitriding, you have Lindberg/MPH and Surface Combustion.  On the horizontal, very recently over the last 20 years, a very popular design is a horizontal vacuum perch retort nitriding and nitrocarburizing furnaces.  There you seen Ipsen, a German company called KGO, but also you have SECO/WARWICK with some proprietary designs (zero flow is also a good concept), and lately Gasbarre came into this business and Solar as well; they have the vacuum purge nitriding firms.

DG:  I want to back up a little.  On the salt bath companies you mentioned several, I also know Ajax Electric, also Upton Industries.  I don’t know if they do FNC units, but I’m assuming that they do.  There are a lot of other companies.

TW:  Salt bath is unique to salt.  There are only two, or three maybe, companies left in the world who supply these salts.  It’s more popular in Japan, by the way.  Anyway, it’s not as big as the gas process.

DG:  So, I’m a company thinking about maybe converting from some other surface hardening process over to FNC.  What kind of questions should I be asking myself?

TW:  It all starts, of course, with the product and the application.  Then you need to understand the wear and the corrosion methods.  That has to be well understood.   If that leads to FNC being the most suitable solution for this application, you need to understand the details of how you want to build up the surface layer, the thickness of your diffusion layer, the compound layer, the wide layer on the top and if you want to do post oxidation, so you will also need to do the oxide layer, which by the way, very often needs to be polished at the end, as well, to increase corrosion resistance.  These kinetics need to be well understood and the wear and what you want to achieve with this.

Then, of course, you have to see the design.  If you have sheet metal components which are cut, the cutting corner usually receives a higher layer and then the corners themselves that built up due to stresses, so there are a couple of minor things that need to have attention.  Then, of course, you need to have an expert who really refines the process, and that has to be done in conjunction with good controls.  There are two or three companies in the market.  UPC is one of them.  Oh, I forgot to mention Nitrex, a big brand.

DG:  UPC is part of Nitrex, but they also do the process.

TW:  Right.  Very important.  Somebody who really understands the nitriding and the control part of it.  UPC Marathon, they have very good controls.  SSI also has the probes.  There is STANGE in Germany as well.  You have two or three companies which have good knowledge in the controls and the probes and how to control this nitriding process.  Then you can build up your desired layer system.  In the layers, you have a diffusion, then you have a compound, a white layer, and then maybe you have an oxide layer on top and that needs to be well understood.  And, of course, as mentioned before, it is essential to have  parts cleaned thoroughly and if you maybe need a polishing afterwards.  Then, of course, how you put them in the furnace (placement) so that the gas can uniformly penetrate the parts.  These are the essential things.

DG:  There you have it, folks.  That’s FNC 101.  Those are the basics in ferritic nitrocarburizing from Thomas Wingens.  Thank you, Thomas.  I appreciate it very much.  I know that if people have questions, you, specifically, would be more than happy to help them out.  The company again is WINGENS LLC – International Industry Consultancy.  Thomas, www.wingens.com.

TW: That’s it!

 

 

 

 

Doug Glenn, Publisher, Heat Treat Today

Doug Glenn, Heat Treat Today publisher and Heat Treat Radio host.


To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio.

Heat Treat Radio #48: The World of Ferritic Nitrocarburizing with Thomas Wingens Read More »

Heat Treat Radio #47: Justin Rydzewski and James Hawthorne on CQI-9 Rev.4 (Part 3 of 4) – Process Tables & New Resources

Heat Treat Radio host, Doug Glenn, conducts Part 3 of this 4-part series with James Hawthorne of Acument Global Technologies and Justin Rydzewski of Controls Service, Inc. about Revision 4 of CQI-9. We will hear about changes in process tables and key information on how to read this revision of CQI-9.

To find the previous episodes in this series, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio.

Below, you can listen to the podcast by clicking on the audio play button or read the edited transcript.

 

 



The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.

Doug Glenn:  Welcome everybody.  In the first episode of CQI-9 Revision 4, we covered pyrometry and Justin mainly covered it because he’s the expert in this area.  In the second episode, we spoke primarily with James and he shared about changes in the heat treat system assessments (HTSAs) and job audits areas.  Justin, if you don’t mind, would you please review with us just exactly what CQI-9 is?

Justin Rydzewski:  It has essentially three primary sections.  You have your heat treat system assessment, which is often abbreviated as the HTSA; you have the pyrometry section; and then you have the process tables.  The job audit is also something that needs to be completed on an annual basis, so it’s a minor section to the document.

DG:  Today we’re going to talk about process tables and some other support portions of the spec.  Let’s jump in.  James, if you don’t mind, maybe you can talk to us a bit about what are these process tables and why are they important?

James Hawthorne:  The HTSA covers the heat treat system and assessing that system.  There are very unique processes that are covered by CQI-9.  Those are captured in the process table section of the CQI-9 document.

Process Table A covers carburizing, carburnitriding, carburrestoration, austempering, and precipitation hardening or aging.  You’ve got sections like B- this covers nitriding and ferritic nitrocarburizing.  Then you have process table C which covers aluminum.  Process Table D covers induction.  Process Table E covers things like annealing, normalizing the stress relief.  And we go all the way up to process Table I.  So, there is a process table for each unique type of heat treat that is out there in the industry and this allows some very specific topics to be covered in those types of processes.  They all cover pretty much the same thing, so I’ll go back just to run through the headers of Process Table A.

The first portion of it is Process and Test Equipment Requirements.  What are the rules of engagement for those items?  The same thing for pyrometry.  There are specific call outs in the process tables.  If this is part of your system, you have to play by these rules.  Some of them will point you to specific sections of pyrometry.  So, if you’re looking at the thermocouple and calibration of thermocouples, the process table is going to tell you that you shall conform to section P3.1 which covers all of those.

Interview with Justin Rydzewski, James Hawthorne, and Doug Glenn
Source: Heat Treat Radio

It also covers the process monitoring frequency.  How often do you have to check your temperatures?  What are the rules of engagement?  It calls out specifically each portion that may be included in that type of process.  If you have a batch style furnace that covers that process, it has certain rules for you to manage your batch process.  If it’s a continuous furnace, you have certain rules on how you would manage that continuous.  If your process has an endothermic or exothermic generator or even some type of nitrogen methanol system, there are rules of engagement on how to manage or review that system for those items.

Then you get into things like inspection. Your in-process and final test parameters are also covered here.  The last portion of it, in section 5 of the process table, is when you get into things like your quenchant and solution test parameters, and what are the rules for checking that.

What’s really nice about the document is that as you traverse the document, for instance, we have in the quenchant and solution test parameters, it’s A5.1.  The next column over, it tells you what is the related HTSA question.  It is set up in a way where you can go to the HTSA right from the process table and see if you’re compliant to what’s listed there as the shell statement and the requirements or the frequency for checking those.

DG:  That answers another question we were going to address, and that is, how do those process tables work with the HTSA?  It sounds like, in a sense, they are cross-indexed. Is that it?

JH:  That’s correct, Doug.  Like we spoke about in the last interview when we were talking about the job audit, the job audit is set up the same way: It has that same column, it tells you what the related question is, and it affords you the ability to easily traverse the document from the questions in the HTSA to the requirements in the process tables.

DG:  Justin, anything else from you on that?

JR:  The way that I typically frame it for people new to CQI-9 is that the process tables essentially define two things. First, your tolerances for process and test parameters, and second, your frequencies for those process test parameters in testing parts, which are specific to each heat treat process.

As James mentioned, there are nine process tables.  The requirements in each of those process tables are going to be specific to that process.  The requirements within the HTSA are intended to be broad and generic.  They’re intended to be applicable to any organization performing one of those heat treat processes.  As you go an HTSA, you will be notified when to refer to the process table for some specific aspect of the tolerance or frequency portion on that particular requirement.

DG:  It sounds like a lot of work has been put into the cross referencing, making it simple and making it user friendly, right?  So, whether you’re in the process or whether you’re in the HTSA, you can quickly and easily find the portion in the other section of the spec that applies to what you’re doing.

JH:  That’s correct.  Plus, it does afford you the opportunity to find compliance in a simpler fashion.

JR:  And to also specify tolerances and frequencies that are appropriate for that given process.  If I’m heat treating aluminum, I might have a tighter tolerance than that of hardening steel.  They are very two different processes susceptible to different things, so the values need to be different.

DG:  When you’re looking at the changes that were made from Rev 3 to Rev 4 with these process tables, is there anything that jumps out at you?

JR:  I think one of the most notable changes is an item that wasn’t changed, actually, and that was the formatting and grading system retained from the 3rd edition.  The primary focus of our efforts with the process tables this go-around was to enhance that clarity.  The most notable change across many of the process tables was the added requirement to continuously monitor and record that temperature control signature for generators.  So, for atmosphere generators, that temperature side of things needs to not just be monitored, but also recorded.

DG:  Having taken just what we’ve heard today about the process tables, thinking back to what we covered in the last section on the HTSAs, and going back, Justin, even to your first episode that we did on pyrometry, it seems like there is a lot of stuff here.  The CQI-9 comes in at 115 pages long, I’m guessing there are going to be people that start dipping their big toe into this thing and say, “What the heck?  I’m struggling here!  I don’t understand.  What’s required of me?”  From what we’ve talked about, before we hit the record button, there are some other very helpful things in this spec besides these table requirements and things of that sort.

Let’s talk about those a little bit.  What are some of those other resources that will help simplify the execution of this spec?

JR:  There’s a lot to it, but the underlying intent was not to confuse or bombard the organization with unnecessary rules and just allowing people to figure it out on their own.  Everything goes through a “stink test” as we’re writing this up.  Everything must make sense to us.  If it doesn’t, it’s typically not added in or it’s refined and beat up until it is okay and then added in.

What can we do or what are the things that would be helpful to the end-user to make sure that they’re adhering to these things and that they understand to a point where they can adhere to it? It is not uncommon for me to find my customers having no problem following the rules so long as they know what they are so that can understand them and they make sense.

To convey that and get that buy-in, we’ve added a few elements and refined others.  I think the most significant one, and it is in the section within the document that I reference most, is the Glossary of Terms.  There is a lot of really good information in there.  It’s not that I’m referencing the Glossary of Terms because I don’t understand what the word “calibration” means or what the difference is between a “control thermocouple” and a “monitoring thermocouple”, it’s how did we define those terms relative to CQI-9 in terms of CQI-9?  How did we intend that word to be utilized?  Sometimes you can find those little bits of detail that make it easier to understand or to capture what some of the requirements are for that are noted within the rest of the main document.

JH:  There are also some illustrations added to the Glossary as well.  There were a couple there before, but there was some refinement to those illustrations that were in there.  Even those harder to define portions where we put those illustrations to help drive home the intent of the message, I think that was done very well in the Glossary section.

DG:  Would you say, James, that that’s the major change to the Glossary, or are there other things that changed there?

Source: Markus Spiske st pixabay.com

JH:  We went through the entire document from cover to cover.  There are many, many minor changes across the board, but there were some definitions that were added to the Glossary as questions came up during our normal meeting cycles, or that came from end-users when asking them how we should define something.

As those questions came in, we added those definitions to help with that guidance.  Especially, as Justin said, as we’re talking in the meetings, if we’re hammering away at it and we have it digested in the room – we understand what we mean – how do we send this message to the rest of the users out there in the world?  The Glossary ended up being a great place for items like that, as well.

JR:  Right.  So instead of using six paragraphs to describe a certain requirement or whatnot, just use proper terminology and then let’s define adequately those terms, which may be contested or not fully understood immediately, in the Glossary of terms so that there is a clear idea of what it is we’re trying to get across and not have to make this thing 185 pages.

[blocktext align=”right”]“In the context of this document [the CQI-9 revision 4], the following definitions shall apply.”[/blocktext]A real good example of things added into the Glossary would be terms that perhaps we all take for granted, terms that you understand what it means, but when you poll ten different people, their definitions are just slightly different.  For example, “grace periods” was a word we added into the Glossary.  Not that it’s an overly complicated term to understand, but relative to the document, it can have an impact on how it is you interpret those certain requirements and what it is that it means for you.  “RTD” was another one added in there from a sensor standpoint.  I think another that might get some attention is the inclusion of “sintering” and “sinter-hardening.”  There was a fair amount of contention on the sintering side of things that CQI-9 wouldn’t apply.  Then we included sinter-hardening, but we didn’t necessarily define the difference between the two processes.  Now, there’s a distinction made, and it’s included in the Glossary.

DG:  As far as the Glossary goes then, is there any guidance on when it should be used?

JR:  Personally, I would say as often as possible.  It is an incredibly overlooked portion of this document.  It is amazing how much confusion can result just from misunderstanding a word that was used.  Using the example of “grace period”; it’s not that I don’t understand what grace period means, it’s that I want to know what grace period means specific to CQI-9.  How is it intended to be utilized?  My definition might be different.  I want to make sure that I’m lining myself with the definition of the word as it’s defined.

There is a statement at the beginning of the Glossary that says, “In the context of this document, the following definitions shall apply.”  So, it’s within the context of this document.  I may have a different context of that word, but it doesn’t matter what my definition is, it only matters as to how it’s defined within this book, the context of this document.

DG:  That’s a good encouragement to have people refer to that Glossary.  Even if you think you know what the word means, it’s probably not a bad idea to make sure that you understand how it’s being used in this document and don’t impose your own definition.

JH:  There is one other thing I would offer, as well.  I totally agree with what Justin is saying, and I think this speaks volumes or reinforces the things that we’ve talked about already on how one portion of the document supports the other portion of the document and supports the other side.  This document, through and through, supports itself.

[blockquote author=”James Hawthorne, Acument Global Technologies” style=”1″]This document, through and through, supports itself.[/blockquote]

DG:  Let’s jump to instructions.  Probably the most important part of any spec or document is the instructions.  Let’s talk about those for a moment, including maybe references, illustrations, figures, and things of that sort.  Major changes?  What should we know about instructions, references, illustrations and figures?

JR:  There are support elements within the document that we’ve spoken about with the glossary of terms and what not, but there are also instances where instructions are called up… Step-by-step instructions on how to do something so that you can feel confident that you’re doing it correctly.  For doing the HTSA (heat treat system assessment), there are instructions for completing that with the process for going about doing the assessment there, or even as simple as completing the cover sheet for the document or the job audit.  There are instructions provided throughout to try to encourage and support someone’s effort in adhering to the requirements in the document.

DG:  Let’s talk about references, illustrations and figures.

JR:  Within the pyrometry section, specifically, there are a lot of instances of illustrations.  For the system accuracy testing illustrations, the intent is instructional.  It is to allow someone a means of seeing it visually both how it’s to be performed and how to correctly perform it.

Whether it’s a probe method A system accuracy test versus a probe method B system accuracy test, the illustrations included now are a bit more clearly refined.  The focus was on eliminating anything that was unnecessary from that illustration to allow the user to more easily focus on those elements that are critical.  The user will find a lot of improved illustrations throughout the pyrometry section.

You might have no issues performing a system accuracy test and you might have been performing them for some period of time. However, it’s still a pretty good idea to make sure that you’re doing it in the manner that CQI-9 requires in order to see if there is anything in there for added guidance and to make sure that you’re not overlooking something. That just includes simple math to perform one of those tests.  Those are also illustrated to show progression of how to go about doing that test properly.

DG:  Are there other resources within this spec that are available to help the user?

JR:  If there is still confusion, it’s not hopeless.  There are other means by which people can reach out to try to get clarification on different interpretations of requirements.  James and I just recently participated in a roll-out where we had a Q&A for people to bring their questions regarding confusion around certain requirements. We provided answers from a clarity standpoint.  That support doesn’t go away, nor is it just available at special events like the roll-out.  At any time, people can, and often do, email into the AIAG with their questions, looking for guidance on certain matters.

If it’s as simple as- “I don’t understand question 214,” write in and ask the question and see if you can get some additional guidance.  If it’s “I don’t understand pyrometry,” that’s a bit of a broader question and you’re probably not going to like the answer you get back (~chuckle~) and you’re probably not going to get what you’re looking for in the answer you get back, but there are many other sources for support outside of the document.

Justin and James recommend reading the whole document and participating in question submission forms to gain a greater understanding and voice in the CQI-9 requirements.

If the document doesn’t have enough, look outside the document.  The AIAG is one of those sources.  Your customer is another one.  If you work with outside service providers (I’m speaking from my world of things – pyrometry), lean on them for guidance and things you don’t understand.  I have my nose in these documents constantly, so my understanding of it is pretty alright.  I can afford some additional guidance or interpretation.

I guess the advice I would have is don’t jump at something blindly and say “it’s going to be enough.”  You’re going to want to have something behind you to give you a little bit more substance than that and to have some confidence in what you’re doing. Otherwise, it will have the tendency to snowball on you.

DG:  Because these documents are “living documents”, they are continually evolving.  Let’s say someone has a suggestion for a change that they would like to see made in a future Rev 5, what should they do?

JH:  At the back of the book, we have what’s called a maintenance request form.  The maintenance request form is a very short and sweet form that allows document users to submit for committee review what changes they believe should be made.  This would give them the forum to always have their voice heard and how they feel, or believe, something should be managed.

To go back to what we were talking about, the CQI-9 technical committee still meets quarterly.  As Justin alluded to, we had questions from the roll-out, but a good portion of our first post completion meeting was answering questions for the heat treater at large to help give that clarification.  And, when we come across a question where we don’t really know what the person is asking or looking for, we give those questions back to our AIAG representative. They may reach out to that submitter to gain clarity on what was being asked so that we can give the best answer possible, not just potentially dilute it by giving an answer just of the sake of answering the question.

There is a lot of opportunity there and as these maintenance request forms come in, they will be handled.  They’ll be handled with the committee and the group will work on it and develop the best answer.  That answer may be, let’s look at making a change, whether that’s through some form of errata or by “putting it on the shelf” until – hopefully a long time from now – we look at a 5th edition. This gives us the ability to capture these things and make sure that it stays on out radar.  We want to make sure that they’re taken care of with the urgency that’s needed.

JR:  I think an item of note here, to make it clear, is any of those maintenance request forms that are sent in, all of them are reviewed by the technical committee.  They are all reviewed.  Anything submitted will make its way in front of that committee to be reviewed to on their agenda.

DG:  What should these forms be?  Is it just for document changes or for other things as well, for suggestions and whatnot?

JR:  It’s for document changes as well as a suggestion box form.

DG:  We’ve covered a lot in this third episode.  We’re going to have a fourth episode that is going to deal with some practical tips from you guys on the actual execution of these things, but is there anything else that you would want to tell the listeners regarding the spec itself?  Any other concluding comments?

JR:  From a process table standpoint, this was something that was reiterated throughout the entire roll-out presentation: it really does take reading the entire document to capture all of the changes.

Some of them are quite minor and some of them stand out as being significant, but for the most part, they are minor, and sometimes minor ones can be very easy to overlook.  There used to be requirements for calibrating your hardness testers on an annual basis.  Those requirements have now been expanded to all lab and test equipment that require an annual calibration.

Another element that was included in the 4th edition was we made an effort to increase the clarity and guidance for the use of exceptions that are applicable to section 4 requirements of the process tables.  For example, these would be used if you’re employing a surrogate test piece in lieu of sectioning some large or expensive product.  If anyone is interested, the clarity is included on page 9.

But make note, these are not blanket requirements; these exceptions require customer approval and ultimately OEM approval, so they must be documented and approved by a customer and increased in your PPAP (Production Part Approval Process) control plan.  There is a fair amount of added clarity on that topic, so it’s something people might want to take a look at and dive into just to make sure that they’re familiar with it.

DG:  James, any concluding comments from your side?

JH:  I think I’d just reinforce a little bit of what Justin was mentioning earlier.  Read the document.  Read as much of it as you can and try to understand as much as you possibly can.  We made a lot of changes.  Some of them are very minor, but some of those minor things could potentially be overlooked if you don’t step back and take a moment to understand the document and how each system, or each portion of the document, works with each other.

DG:  The next episode is going to have some practical tips.  We’re going to pick the brains of these two gentlemen on navigating Revision 4.  You won’t want to miss it.  There are going to be opportunities here to basically figure out some of the details.

If you have questions, feel free to send them in.  You can email htt@heattreattoday.com if you have any questions and we may get those answered.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Doug Glenn, Publisher, Heat Treat Today

Doug Glenn, Heat Treat Today publisher and Heat Treat Radio host.


To find other Heat Treat Radio episodes, go to www.heattreattoday.com/radio.

Heat Treat Radio #47: Justin Rydzewski and James Hawthorne on CQI-9 Rev.4 (Part 3 of 4) – Process Tables & New Resources Read More »