Search Documents

By R. W. Hyde, S. E. Eaton, B. S. Old

One of the most important problems facing the steel industry at the present time is that of maintaining at a minimum the sulphur content of many grades of steel where sulphur is known to have harmful effects On both quality and yield. The present outlook in this struggle to reduce the amount of sulphur in steel is rather gloomy since the sulphur content of the raw materials available in the United States is gradually rising, with little relief in sight. A flow sheet of sulphur in the steel process is shown in Fig I. The values used here were obtained by averaging coke oven and blast furnace data at No. 5 furnace in Cleveland and are considered typical for high top pressure practice. The sulphur evolved in the blast furnace top gas was obtained by difference and since the amount is relatively small, little significance should be attached to this particular value. From Fig I it is apparent, however, that coals used in the production of metallurgical coke represent by far the largest single source of sulphur in steel-making. As an indication of the decrease in quality of these coals as regards sulphur content the weighed average annual sulphur analysis of the coals supplied to two different steel plants, since 1925, is plotted in Fig 2} The sharp rise since 1940 is strikingly apparent. Another indication of this trend is found in estimates of coking coal reserves. Thus in the case of Pittsburgh seam coals available in Allegheny, Fayette, Greene, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties in Pa. as of Jan. 1937 only 25 pct of the coal reserves would contain less than 1.50 pct sulphur after washing.2.3 Many of these lower sulphur reserves have been seriously depleted in recent years because of accelerated war demands. still another demonstration of the increasing sulphur content of coals on a country-wide basis is found in a report by the Bureau of Mines4 which shows a steady increase in the sulphur content of coke made in the United States. It should be noted that this increase continues in spite of the wider use of coal washing in recent years. Sulphur occurs in coal in three forms, pyritic (FeS2), organic sulphur, and a small amount of sulphate sulphur (CaS04). The sulphur is subsequently found in the coke in combination with carbonaceous material of is composition and as calcium and iron sulphides' In considering the general problem of sulphur elimination, the Republic Steel Corp. was interested in determining which, if either, of the two major forms of sulphur in coal contributes the greater portion of sulphur to the coke. Since the ratio of pyritic to organic sulphur varies widely in different coals, it was thought that if it could be shown definitely that the major part of the sulphur occurring in coke originates from one of the two ""jar forms of sulphur in the coal, it would then be possible to select with confidence coal which, although high .in total sulphur, would yield coke of fairly low sulphur content. Using the new

Jan 1, 1949

By R. W. Hyde, B. S. Old, S. E. Eaton

One of the most important problems facing the steel industry at the present time is that of maintaining at a minimum the sulphur content of many grades of steel where sulphur is known to have harmful effects On both quality and yield. The present outlook in this struggle to reduce the amount of sulphur in steel is rather gloomy since the sulphur content of the raw materials available in the United States is gradually rising, with little relief in sight. A flow sheet of sulphur in the steel process is shown in Fig I. The values used here were obtained by averaging coke oven and blast furnace data at No. 5 furnace in Cleveland and are considered typical for high top pressure practice. The sulphur evolved in the blast furnace top gas was obtained by difference and since the amount is relatively small, little significance should be attached to this particular value. From Fig I it is apparent, however, that coals used in the production of metallurgical coke represent by far the largest single source of sulphur in steel-making. As an indication of the decrease in quality of these coals as regards sulphur content the weighed average annual sulphur analysis of the coals supplied to two different steel plants, since 1925, is plotted in Fig 2} The sharp rise since 1940 is strikingly apparent. Another indication of this trend is found in estimates of coking coal reserves. Thus in the case of Pittsburgh seam coals available in Allegheny, Fayette, Greene, Washington, and Westmoreland Counties in Pa. as of Jan. 1937 only 25 pct of the coal reserves would contain less than 1.50 pct sulphur after washing.2.3 Many of these lower sulphur reserves have been seriously depleted in recent years because of accelerated war demands. still another demonstration of the increasing sulphur content of coals on a country-wide basis is found in a report by the Bureau of Mines4 which shows a steady increase in the sulphur content of coke made in the United States. It should be noted that this increase continues in spite of the wider use of coal washing in recent years. Sulphur occurs in coal in three forms, pyritic (FeS2), organic sulphur, and a small amount of sulphate sulphur (CaS04). The sulphur is subsequently found in the coke in combination with carbonaceous material of is composition and as calcium and iron sulphides' In considering the general problem of sulphur elimination, the Republic Steel Corp. was interested in determining which, if either, of the two major forms of sulphur in coal contributes the greater portion of sulphur to the coke. Since the ratio of pyritic to organic sulphur varies widely in different coals, it was thought that if it could be shown definitely that the major part of the sulphur occurring in coke originates from one of the two ""jar forms of sulphur in the coal, it would then be possible to select with confidence coal which, although high .in total sulphur, would yield coke of fairly low sulphur content. Using the new

Jan 1, 1949

By B. M. Larsen

Jan 1, 1948

By B. M. Larsen

Jan 1, 1948

By Terkel Rosenqvist

Few subjects in iron metallurgy and steelmaking have caused so much discussion and have resulted in so many divergent and partly contradictory statements as the theory of the distribution of sulphur between molten iron and slag. An interesting survey of the different points of view is given by Grant and Chipman.1 Grant and Chipman themselves conclude in their paper that, at least in the open hearth and electric steel furnaces, the governing reaction is a simple distribution like: FeS steel ? FeS alas [Ia] and MnS steel ? MnS alas [Ib] They conclude that no significant reaction takes place according to the more classical scheme: FeS steel + CaO slag ? FeOslag + CaS slag [2a] This is the reaction which is regarded by most investigators as the primary sulphur reaction in the blast furnaces, where it is accompanied by the reaction with carbon: FeO slag + C ? Fe + CO [2b] The writer suggests an alternative to the reactions mentioned above. It is the opinion of the writer that the a priori assumption of defined molecular compounds being present in molten steel as well as in molten slag, has retarded rather than promoted a solution of the sulphur problem. As for the constituents of molten steel, it is taking too much for granted to mention the presence of FeS and MnS. If this infers that the melt contains diatomic molecules, the statement must be made that at least such molecules do not exist in the solid state at room temperature. Solid FeS crystallizes in the nickel-arsenide structure, and MnS (high temperature form) in the sodium-chloride structure. In these structures the sulphur is surrounded by six metal neighbors, and no molecular groups can be isolated. When sulphur is dissolved in molten steel, it is expected to maintain the same coordination number as in the solid state. We know that sulphur in steel has a certain chemical potential and a chemical activity which can be expressed by the reaction: S steel + H2 ? H2S where the activity A. is proportional to the ratio PH2S/Ph2. We know also that this activity is influenced by the presence of other constituents. For instance, there is reason to assume that carbon and silicon increase the sulphur activity and manganese decreases it. However, the exact relationship here is scarcely known, and further investigations are needed. Concerning the molten slags, if anything should be assumed a priori it would be that they are composed of ionic rather than molecular parts. There are indications of this in that solid silicates form ionic structures, and molten slags show high electric conductivity and can be electrolyzed.2 It has been claimed by Taylor and Chipman3 that their activity investigations

Jan 1, 1949

By Terkel Rosenqvist

Few subjects in iron metallurgy and steelmaking have caused so much discussion and have resulted in so many divergent and partly contradictory statements as the theory of the distribution of sulphur between molten iron and slag. An interesting survey of the different points of view is given by Grant and Chipman.1 Grant and Chipman themselves conclude in their paper that, at least in the open hearth and electric steel furnaces, the governing reaction is a simple distribution like: FeS steel ? FeS alas [Ia] and MnS steel ? MnS alas [Ib] They conclude that no significant reaction takes place according to the more classical scheme: FeS steel + CaO slag ? FeOslag + CaS slag [2a] This is the reaction which is regarded by most investigators as the primary sulphur reaction in the blast furnaces, where it is accompanied by the reaction with carbon: FeO slag + C ? Fe + CO [2b] The writer suggests an alternative to the reactions mentioned above. It is the opinion of the writer that the a priori assumption of defined molecular compounds being present in molten steel as well as in molten slag, has retarded rather than promoted a solution of the sulphur problem. As for the constituents of molten steel, it is taking too much for granted to mention the presence of FeS and MnS. If this infers that the melt contains diatomic molecules, the statement must be made that at least such molecules do not exist in the solid state at room temperature. Solid FeS crystallizes in the nickel-arsenide structure, and MnS (high temperature form) in the sodium-chloride structure. In these structures the sulphur is surrounded by six metal neighbors, and no molecular groups can be isolated. When sulphur is dissolved in molten steel, it is expected to maintain the same coordination number as in the solid state. We know that sulphur in steel has a certain chemical potential and a chemical activity which can be expressed by the reaction: S steel + H2 ? H2S where the activity A. is proportional to the ratio PH2S/Ph2. We know also that this activity is influenced by the presence of other constituents. For instance, there is reason to assume that carbon and silicon increase the sulphur activity and manganese decreases it. However, the exact relationship here is scarcely known, and further investigations are needed. Concerning the molten slags, if anything should be assumed a priori it would be that they are composed of ionic rather than molecular parts. There are indications of this in that solid silicates form ionic structures, and molten slags show high electric conductivity and can be electrolyzed.2 It has been claimed by Taylor and Chipman3 that their activity investigations

Jan 1, 1949

By C. A. Siebert, G. Sandoz

Oil quenching of steel, in good commercial practice, is carried out using a great deal of agitation in the quenching bath. Many of the tests reported in the literature represent the results obtained on steels quenched into still oil. Scott1 describes three stages of cooling in liquid quenching baths, namely: "State 'A'— Vapor Blanket Cooling—In this, the first stage, a thin stable vapor film surrounds the hot metal. Cooling is by conduction and radiation through the gaseous film and is therefore relatively slow. "Stage 'B'—Vapor Transport Cooling— Termination of the 'A' stage is marked by wetting of the metal surface. Vapor forms copiously in bubbles and is carried away by gravity and convection currents to condense in cooler surrounding liquid. This is the fastest stage of cooling. "Stage 'C'—Liquid Cooling—The 'B' stage ends as the surface temperature of the metal approaches the boiling point of the quenching liquid. Vapor no longer forms, so cooling is by conduction and convection and the temperature difference is greatly decreased. This mode of cooling is slower than that of the 'B' stage." Mechanical agitation of the quenching medium will accelerate all three stages of cooling. The greatest effect, however, will be noted on stage ' B' because the removal of the bubbles from the surface of the steel will not be entirely dependent upon gravity and natural convection currents. The method employed in this investigation for evaluating the oils was the end quench test. The various oils were substituted for water as the quenching liquid and hardness determinations were made at various distances from the quenched end. Most of the tests were run using a 3/8-in. orifice with a 21/2-in. stream height. However, to check the effect of other velocities two additional conditions were used, namely: (I) A 3/8-in. orifice and I-in. stream height, and (2) a 1/2-in. orifice and a 31/2-in. stream height. In all cases the samples were suspended so that the quenched end was 1/2-in. above the orifice. Some tests were run on an NE 8740, .3,312, and a 4340 steel. The results obtained on these steels confirmed those obtained on the NE 9450 and have therefore been Omitted from this paper. The test bars were machined from 1/8-in. stock to I-in. diam by 4 in. long.

Jan 1, 1949

By G. Sandoz, C. A. Siebert

Oil quenching of steel, in good commercial practice, is carried out using a great deal of agitation in the quenching bath. Many of the tests reported in the literature represent the results obtained on steels quenched into still oil. Scott1 describes three stages of cooling in liquid quenching baths, namely: "State 'A'— Vapor Blanket Cooling—In this, the first stage, a thin stable vapor film surrounds the hot metal. Cooling is by conduction and radiation through the gaseous film and is therefore relatively slow. "Stage 'B'—Vapor Transport Cooling— Termination of the 'A' stage is marked by wetting of the metal surface. Vapor forms copiously in bubbles and is carried away by gravity and convection currents to condense in cooler surrounding liquid. This is the fastest stage of cooling. "Stage 'C'—Liquid Cooling—The 'B' stage ends as the surface temperature of the metal approaches the boiling point of the quenching liquid. Vapor no longer forms, so cooling is by conduction and convection and the temperature difference is greatly decreased. This mode of cooling is slower than that of the 'B' stage." Mechanical agitation of the quenching medium will accelerate all three stages of cooling. The greatest effect, however, will be noted on stage ' B' because the removal of the bubbles from the surface of the steel will not be entirely dependent upon gravity and natural convection currents. The method employed in this investigation for evaluating the oils was the end quench test. The various oils were substituted for water as the quenching liquid and hardness determinations were made at various distances from the quenched end. Most of the tests were run using a 3/8-in. orifice with a 21/2-in. stream height. However, to check the effect of other velocities two additional conditions were used, namely: (I) A 3/8-in. orifice and I-in. stream height, and (2) a 1/2-in. orifice and a 31/2-in. stream height. In all cases the samples were suspended so that the quenched end was 1/2-in. above the orifice. Some tests were run on an NE 8740, .3,312, and a 4340 steel. The results obtained on these steels confirmed those obtained on the NE 9450 and have therefore been Omitted from this paper. The test bars were machined from 1/8-in. stock to I-in. diam by 4 in. long.

Jan 1, 1949

By J. H. Hollomon, L. D. Jaffe, M. R. Norton

In the practical heat-treatment of steel the decomposition of austenite usually occurs during cooling rather than at constant temperature. Nevertheless, the course of this decomposition has generally been studied only isothermally. Isothermal studies are not only simpler experimentally, but have the great theoretical advantage that one of the variables, temperature, is constant. It is the purpose of this paper to outline the principles that govern the relations between isothermal and anisothermalt‡ decomposition of austenite, to present and systematize the available experimental information, and to indicate the gaps in the existing knowledge. Some of the experimental information is the result of new work.§ Most of it is derived from scattered data in the literature. Many of these data were obtained incidentally in the course of research on other subjects and their significance has not been pointed out and perhaps not understood. It is hoped that this paper will aid future planning of more extensive research on anisothermal decomposition. Method In order to study the relations between isothermal and anisothermal decomposition, it appears fruitful to view anisothermal decomposition as taking place at a series of constant temperatures1 (except for the martensite reaction, which does not occur isothermally to an appreciable extent). When the time the steel is at each temperature is finite, the over-all amount of the reaction is considered to be the sum of the amounts occurring at each of the successive temperatures. During continuous cooling or heating, the time the steel is at each temperature and the difference between successive temperatures can be considered to approach zero. The over-all amount of transformation will then be given by integration over the range of temperatures involved. This point of view is advantageous in that it considers anisothermal transformation to be a series of isothermal transformations. The problem thus becomes one of determining the effect of partial decomposition at any given temperature upon subsequent decomposition at another temperature. Single Anisothermal Reaction Consider a phase brought to a temperature at which it is unstable, held there until it has partially transformed, and then brought to another temperature at

Jan 1, 1947

By L. D. Jaffe, M. R. Norton, J. H. Hollomon

In the practical heat-treatment of steel the decomposition of austenite usually occurs during cooling rather than at constant temperature. Nevertheless, the course of this decomposition has generally been studied only isothermally. Isothermal studies are not only simpler experimentally, but have the great theoretical advantage that one of the variables, temperature, is constant. It is the purpose of this paper to outline the principles that govern the relations between isothermal and anisothermalt‡ decomposition of austenite, to present and systematize the available experimental information, and to indicate the gaps in the existing knowledge. Some of the experimental information is the result of new work.§ Most of it is derived from scattered data in the literature. Many of these data were obtained incidentally in the course of research on other subjects and their significance has not been pointed out and perhaps not understood. It is hoped that this paper will aid future planning of more extensive research on anisothermal decomposition. Method In order to study the relations between isothermal and anisothermal decomposition, it appears fruitful to view anisothermal decomposition as taking place at a series of constant temperatures1 (except for the martensite reaction, which does not occur isothermally to an appreciable extent). When the time the steel is at each temperature is finite, the over-all amount of the reaction is considered to be the sum of the amounts occurring at each of the successive temperatures. During continuous cooling or heating, the time the steel is at each temperature and the difference between successive temperatures can be considered to approach zero. The over-all amount of transformation will then be given by integration over the range of temperatures involved. This point of view is advantageous in that it considers anisothermal transformation to be a series of isothermal transformations. The problem thus becomes one of determining the effect of partial decomposition at any given temperature upon subsequent decomposition at another temperature. Single Anisothermal Reaction Consider a phase brought to a temperature at which it is unstable, held there until it has partially transformed, and then brought to another temperature at

Jan 1, 1947

By Leonard D. Jaffe

In recent years, the advantages of tempered martensite as a microstructure for steel parts have been well established. For parts that must not fracture brittlely when loaded at high rates, at low temperatures, or under conditions of combined stress, tempered martensite is especially desirable. One of the factors that determine whether a steel part will have a martensitic structure after heat treatment is the hardenability of the steel. Despite the large amount of recent research, there are still many unsettled basic questions concerning hardenability and its relation to chemical composition, and, indeed, considerable disagreement among investigators in the field. Much of the uncertainty that beclouds the existing knowledge of hardenability arises from the fact that hardenability is still a wholly empirical concept, and has not been quantitatively related to the more fundamental knowledge of isothermal decomposition of austenite. Hardenability is, essentiaily, a measure of the time required for small percentages of austenite to decompose, during continuous cooling, to pearlite, bainite, proeutectoid ferrite, or proeutec-toid carbide. In the practical heat-treat- ment of steel, also, the decomposition of austenite is usually not isothermal but rather during cooling, or, in general, is not at a single constant temperature. Thus, both hardenability and practical heat treatment involve anisothermal decomposition of austenite. In a previous publication1 the author and his collaborators outlined the principles that govern the relations between isothermal and anisothermal decomposition of austenite, and reviewed the experimental information available in 1945. To avoid repetition, familiarity with that article (Paper I) will be assumed, and attention given primarily to work carried out or published since 1945. The method generally employed was explained in Paper I: anisothermal transformation is studied through investigation of the effect of holding austenite at one temperature upon its subsequent decomposition at another temperature. Both temperatures are below the stability range of the austenite. This paper is confined to studies in which only a small amount of transformation occurred at the first temperature. This is the only case of importance in practical heat treatment when an essentially martensitic structure is sought. Materials and Procedure It was necessary to use different steels for the studies involving proeutectoid ferrite and for those involving proeutectoid carbide, beeause the two constituents have not been found to form in the same steel. Several steels were tried and rejected

Jan 1, 1949

By Leonard D. Jaffe

In recent years, the advantages of tempered martensite as a microstructure for steel parts have been well established. For parts that must not fracture brittlely when loaded at high rates, at low temperatures, or under conditions of combined stress, tempered martensite is especially desirable. One of the factors that determine whether a steel part will have a martensitic structure after heat treatment is the hardenability of the steel. Despite the large amount of recent research, there are still many unsettled basic questions concerning hardenability and its relation to chemical composition, and, indeed, considerable disagreement among investigators in the field. Much of the uncertainty that beclouds the existing knowledge of hardenability arises from the fact that hardenability is still a wholly empirical concept, and has not been quantitatively related to the more fundamental knowledge of isothermal decomposition of austenite. Hardenability is, essentiaily, a measure of the time required for small percentages of austenite to decompose, during continuous cooling, to pearlite, bainite, proeutectoid ferrite, or proeutec-toid carbide. In the practical heat-treat- ment of steel, also, the decomposition of austenite is usually not isothermal but rather during cooling, or, in general, is not at a single constant temperature. Thus, both hardenability and practical heat treatment involve anisothermal decomposition of austenite. In a previous publication1 the author and his collaborators outlined the principles that govern the relations between isothermal and anisothermal decomposition of austenite, and reviewed the experimental information available in 1945. To avoid repetition, familiarity with that article (Paper I) will be assumed, and attention given primarily to work carried out or published since 1945. The method generally employed was explained in Paper I: anisothermal transformation is studied through investigation of the effect of holding austenite at one temperature upon its subsequent decomposition at another temperature. Both temperatures are below the stability range of the austenite. This paper is confined to studies in which only a small amount of transformation occurred at the first temperature. This is the only case of importance in practical heat treatment when an essentially martensitic structure is sought. Materials and Procedure It was necessary to use different steels for the studies involving proeutectoid ferrite and for those involving proeutectoid carbide, beeause the two constituents have not been found to form in the same steel. Several steels were tried and rejected

Jan 1, 1949

By M. Cohen, R. T. Howard

The purpose of this paper is to direct attention to the lower part of the austenite transformation diagram, or TTT curves, where considerable uncertainty still exists as to the blending of the bainite and martensite reactions. The dissimilarities between these two low temperature transforrnations have been summarized recently by Troiano and Greninger.' Of particular importance to the present work is the fact that martensite formation, unlike bainite formation, is not suppressed by the fastest quenching rates attainable. However, most of the investigations in this direction have been concerned primarily with the start of the martensite transformation (Mg) during cooling, rather than with the quantitative aspects of the subsequent reaction on either further cooling or isothermal holding. Several years ago, Cohen2 suggested a form of transformation diagram which reconciled, at least schematically, the isothermal characteristics of the bainite transformation with the insuppressible nature of the martensite transformation. In essence, the diagram consisted of a family of horizontal lines (representing the progress of the austenite-martensite reaction during quenching) which were interrupted in point of time by the bainite family of C-curves extending down from higher temperatures. This picture received later support by metal-lographic3 and dilatometric4,5 studies, but the techniques employed were not sufficiently critical to substantiate some of the details. Elmendorf6 and Grange and Stewardi have shown that the Greninger-Troiano metallographic technique8 may be used not only for M, determinations, but for studying the course of further austenite decomposition. In fact, the latter investigators have observed the amount of martensite formed as a function of temperature below M, in fourteen commercial steels. In the present paper, the Greninger-Troiano technique has been combined with the lineal method of Howard and Cohen9 to provide a unique, quantitative treatment of the austenite-martensite reaction. Furthermore, isothermal transformations have been similarly measured on holding at temperatures above and below M., thus permitting a fairly detailed presentation of the lower part of the conventional austenite transformation diagram. Experimental Details Materials The steels, listed in Table I, were selected for study because they exhibit a satisfactory range of M. temperatures and have not received as much attention as the lower carbon grades. They were prepared as 30 lb induction furnace heats in the laboratories of the Vanadium-Alloys

Jan 1, 1949

By M. Cohen, R. T. Howard

The purpose of this paper is to direct attention to the lower part of the austenite transformation diagram, or TTT curves, where considerable uncertainty still exists as to the blending of the bainite and martensite reactions. The dissimilarities between these two low temperature transforrnations have been summarized recently by Troiano and Greninger.' Of particular importance to the present work is the fact that martensite formation, unlike bainite formation, is not suppressed by the fastest quenching rates attainable. However, most of the investigations in this direction have been concerned primarily with the start of the martensite transformation (Mg) during cooling, rather than with the quantitative aspects of the subsequent reaction on either further cooling or isothermal holding. Several years ago, Cohen2 suggested a form of transformation diagram which reconciled, at least schematically, the isothermal characteristics of the bainite transformation with the insuppressible nature of the martensite transformation. In essence, the diagram consisted of a family of horizontal lines (representing the progress of the austenite-martensite reaction during quenching) which were interrupted in point of time by the bainite family of C-curves extending down from higher temperatures. This picture received later support by metal-lographic3 and dilatometric4,5 studies, but the techniques employed were not sufficiently critical to substantiate some of the details. Elmendorf6 and Grange and Stewardi have shown that the Greninger-Troiano metallographic technique8 may be used not only for M, determinations, but for studying the course of further austenite decomposition. In fact, the latter investigators have observed the amount of martensite formed as a function of temperature below M, in fourteen commercial steels. In the present paper, the Greninger-Troiano technique has been combined with the lineal method of Howard and Cohen9 to provide a unique, quantitative treatment of the austenite-martensite reaction. Furthermore, isothermal transformations have been similarly measured on holding at temperatures above and below M., thus permitting a fairly detailed presentation of the lower part of the conventional austenite transformation diagram. Experimental Details Materials The steels, listed in Table I, were selected for study because they exhibit a satisfactory range of M. temperatures and have not received as much attention as the lower carbon grades. They were prepared as 30 lb induction furnace heats in the laboratories of the Vanadium-Alloys

Jan 1, 1949

By Clarence Zener

The heat-treatment of steels will not pass from the stage of an art into that of a science until the mechanism of the phase transformations associated therewith is thoroughly understood. Such an understanding will involve two distinct types of inquiry: (I) the direction of the transformation, (2) the speed of the transformation. The first type of inquiry, which involves only the equilibrium relations between the various phases in steel, is the subject of the present and of a succeeding article; the second type, which involves the kinetics of transformations, will be the subject of a later article. In order that a theory of equilibrium relations may give useful information, certain experimental data must be put into the theory. It is customary for these data to be of a thermal nature. In the system discussed herein—steel—such thermal data are very scarce. In medium-alloy steels another type of data might possibly be used. In these steels the concentration of solute is so low that it may be possible to use the approximation of dilute solutions, an approximation that leads to linear relationships. The unknown functions, or constants, may then be determined in some cases from the binary iron-alloy system and in other cases from the ternary iron-carbon-alloy system. From the functions, or constants, so determined may then be computed the equilibrium relations in more complex medium-alloy steels. In the present article this second approach is used, the necessary experimental data 'being obtained from the simple binary and ternary equilibrium diagrams. Fundamental Equations In this article are derived the equilibrium relations between the gamma, alpha and cementite phases. In these three phases all important alloying elements except carbon form substitutional solutions, each alloying atom occupying a potential site for an iron atom. Carbon, on the other hand, forms an interstitial solution. In the face-centered cubic gamma phase, the interstitial positions are at the center of the unit cube and at the centers of the cube edges. There are therefore four interstitial positions per unit cell, or one per iron atom. In the body-centered cubic alpha phase, the interstitial positions are probably at the face centers, and also at the centers of the edges, which are crystallographically equivalent to the face centers. There are therefore six interstitial positions per unit cube, or three per iron atom. In cementite, (Fe, Alloy)3C, the carbon atoms may. be regarded as filling all the lattice positions of a given type. The introduction of the fundamental the of equilibrium has presented the author with a quandary. These equations are formally so similar to other equations that have been derived1,2 for related systems that they may appear to some readers

Jan 1, 1947

By Clarence Zener

The heat-treatment of steels will not pass from the stage of an art into that of a science until the mechanism of the phase transformations associated therewith is thoroughly understood. Such an understanding will involve two distinct types of inquiry: (I) the direction of the transformation, (2) the speed of the transformation. The first type of inquiry, which involves only the equilibrium relations between the various phases in steel, is the subject of the present and of a succeeding article; the second type, which involves the kinetics of transformations, will be the subject of a later article. In order that a theory of equilibrium relations may give useful information, certain experimental data must be put into the theory. It is customary for these data to be of a thermal nature. In the system discussed herein—steel—such thermal data are very scarce. In medium-alloy steels another type of data might possibly be used. In these steels the concentration of solute is so low that it may be possible to use the approximation of dilute solutions, an approximation that leads to linear relationships. The unknown functions, or constants, may then be determined in some cases from the binary iron-alloy system and in other cases from the ternary iron-carbon-alloy system. From the functions, or constants, so determined may then be computed the equilibrium relations in more complex medium-alloy steels. In the present article this second approach is used, the necessary experimental data 'being obtained from the simple binary and ternary equilibrium diagrams. Fundamental Equations In this article are derived the equilibrium relations between the gamma, alpha and cementite phases. In these three phases all important alloying elements except carbon form substitutional solutions, each alloying atom occupying a potential site for an iron atom. Carbon, on the other hand, forms an interstitial solution. In the face-centered cubic gamma phase, the interstitial positions are at the center of the unit cube and at the centers of the cube edges. There are therefore four interstitial positions per unit cell, or one per iron atom. In the body-centered cubic alpha phase, the interstitial positions are probably at the face centers, and also at the centers of the edges, which are crystallographically equivalent to the face centers. There are therefore six interstitial positions per unit cube, or three per iron atom. In cementite, (Fe, Alloy)3C, the carbon atoms may. be regarded as filling all the lattice positions of a given type. The introduction of the fundamental the of equilibrium has presented the author with a quandary. These equations are formally so similar to other equations that have been derived1,2 for related systems that they may appear to some readers

Jan 1, 1947

By J. M. Hodge, M. A. Orehoski

The relationship between hardenability based on a 50 per cent martensite criterion, and that based on higher percentages of martensite in a number of low-alloy steels was discussed in a previous paper by the authors.' It was found that the differences between the hardenability values based on the 50 per cent martensite and full martensite criterions increased as the hardenability increased and that, in the steels of higher hardenability, these differ-

Jan 1, 1947

By M. A. Orehoski, J. M. Hodge

The relationship between hardenability based on a 50 per cent martensite criterion, and that based on higher percentages of martensite in a number of low-alloy steels was discussed in a previous paper by the authors.' It was found that the differences between the hardenability values based on the 50 per cent martensite and full martensite criterions increased as the hardenability increased and that, in the steels of higher hardenability, these differ-

Jan 1, 1947

By Clarence Zener

Contents Page General Principles................................................................. 551 Equilibrium Diagrams......................................................... 551 Nucleation................................................................... 553 Kinetics of Phase-boundary Propagation......................................... 553 Kinetics of Growth of New Phase............................................... 556 Spheroidization............................................................... 560 Pure Iron-carbon System........................................................... 561 Formation of Pearlite.......................................................... 561 Interlamellar Spacing........................................................ 562 Pearlite C-curve............................................................. 563 Bainite Formation............................................................. 565 Formation of Martensite....................................................... 570 Loss of Tetragonality of Martensite.............................................. 570 Effect of Alloys upon Decomposition of Austenite..................................... 572 Pearlite...................................................................... 572 Bainite and Martensite......................................................... 574 Time-temperature-transformation Curves............................................. 576 Appendix A............................................................. ......... 579 Appendix B....................................................................... 580 Appendix C....................................................................... 580 The present investigation started in an attempt to understand certain details of the decomposition of austenite, and of the effect of alloying elements thereon. As the investigation proceeded it became apparent that not only these details, but all the general features of austenite decomposition, could be understood in terms of fundamental physical principles. Since the direct applicability of these physical principles has not been previously recognized, it was decided to incorporate the original results of the investigation into a review of the general subject of the kinetics of austenite decomposition. This review constitutes the present article. An extended summary of the results is given on pages 576 to 579. This article, which deals with the kinetics of phase transformations, may appropriately be considered as a sequel to two recent articles1,2 from this laboratory on the equilibrium relations in medium alloy steels.

Jan 1, 1947

By Clarence Zener

Contents Page General Principles................................................................. 551 Equilibrium Diagrams......................................................... 551 Nucleation................................................................... 553 Kinetics of Phase-boundary Propagation......................................... 553 Kinetics of Growth of New Phase............................................... 556 Spheroidization............................................................... 560 Pure Iron-carbon System........................................................... 561 Formation of Pearlite.......................................................... 561 Interlamellar Spacing........................................................ 562 Pearlite C-curve............................................................. 563 Bainite Formation............................................................. 565 Formation of Martensite....................................................... 570 Loss of Tetragonality of Martensite.............................................. 570 Effect of Alloys upon Decomposition of Austenite..................................... 572 Pearlite...................................................................... 572 Bainite and Martensite......................................................... 574 Time-temperature-transformation Curves............................................. 576 Appendix A............................................................. ......... 579 Appendix B....................................................................... 580 Appendix C....................................................................... 580 The present investigation started in an attempt to understand certain details of the decomposition of austenite, and of the effect of alloying elements thereon. As the investigation proceeded it became apparent that not only these details, but all the general features of austenite decomposition, could be understood in terms of fundamental physical principles. Since the direct applicability of these physical principles has not been previously recognized, it was decided to incorporate the original results of the investigation into a review of the general subject of the kinetics of austenite decomposition. This review constitutes the present article. An extended summary of the results is given on pages 576 to 579. This article, which deals with the kinetics of phase transformations, may appropriately be considered as a sequel to two recent articles1,2 from this laboratory on the equilibrium relations in medium alloy steels.

Jan 1, 1947