Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by kb0fhp

  1. I would also use a fast oil - one that is meant for quenching - there are a lot of them. ATF fluid is mineral oil (usually) and it would be too slow. Motor oil is an unknown, and likely to stain the parts. It also has an unknown flash temperature. There is a reason quench oils have been developed, to get properties and properly control distortion. There a variety of sources, even some on this board that sell them in the necessary quantities.
  2. I like "Steel and its Heat Treatment" by George Krauss, ASM "Making, Shaping and Treating of Steel" is always good - but I prefer the Blue edition (about 1968 publishing date) "Steel Heat Treatment Handbook" - Totten and Howes Just to name a few. Scott
  3. That looks much better - but I am not sure why you have two SSRs - seems that one would work. Perhaps I don't understand the element wiring.
  4. I know it is commonly done with industrial castings - I am not sure or unfamilar with scuplture type castings. Perhaps the chalk was a bit damp....It really doesn't take much for the moisture to cause a problem. The benefits are reduced gas porosity, and reduced inclusions. Also most use a bottom pour for industrial sized castings to reduce gas porosity.
  5. The melt was too gassy. You have to make sure that you properly degas the melt prior to pouring.
  6. I see a woman with her mouth open - like yawning. Very nice work
  7. 4140 is a deep hardening grade - meaning that it will be very difficult to get any sort of hamon. It is best oil quenched because it is very prone to cracking. But you can harden stuff in really thick sections all the way through....
  8. I might try grinding the rocks down, acid leaching out the copper, then plating it out. Then I would have relatively pure copper to start with.....Or you could precipitate the copper out of solution using sufuric acid to dissolve the copper, then add something to cause the copper to precipitate out as copper sulfate. Then it is heated to drive off the sulfur, and an ingot of copper is left with stinky sulfur on top.
  9. The higher in temperature you go - the better. You might want to try using ferroalloys instead of the direct alloys. This will allow you to use a lower temperature, and help with mixing.
  10. Do you have the pin-out to the temperature controller and the relay - that would help a lot. If not - do you have the temperature controller description? I can search for the controller and help with the wiring. Also, what configuration are the elements (WYE or DELTA)? You will also need a thermocouple. I would also suggest a cheap excess temperature controller to shut down the elements in case of a thermocouple break. Scott
  11. Looking at the pictures of the fracture, you have a very small region surrounding the blade that is uniform. This is very suggestive of decarburization. Not knowing the dimensions of the cross section, it is not possible to determine the depth of the region. But I strongly suspect that decarb is the source for the part being soft. On the broken piece, use a grinder and gently grind away about 1/16" and try the file again. It should be hard. You could also cut the piece in half with a saw and try the file on the inside of the piece - it should also be hard. If it is 5160 then just about anything will harden it - it is a very deep hardening grade. You could almost forced air cool it and it will get hard. IMHO. Scott
  12. I tried to get a bigger diagram - but that was free - a bigger diagram cost big bucks for subscription
  13. I would strongly suggest heating the oil. Because of the thin viscosity, it will require just a bit of heat - it will make it a bit faster - to a point. If you heat it too much the vapor phase will dominate and it will become slower. Perhaps the clay is also too thick - also consider just a bit of agitation directed up - it will help break up the vapor phase and make it faster. Oil will not be faster or as fast as water - but that is the point. Agitation will make it faster but only to a point. Scott
  14. This is pretty interesting stuff. Initially, looking at the periodic table, I would expect it to act like Mn, but because the crystal structure is different - and the size of the lattice is different, it would probably be a dispersoid former, and act to raise the recrystallization temperature. It might also report to the grain boundaries, and act to pin the grain boundaries, preventing or minimizing grain growth. It could also act to slow creep. But regardless, it would not be soluble in Fe to any great amount because of the large mis-match in the crystal lattice. But then, it could also be fairly soluble like cobalt which is also hexagonal - it depends on the matching between the a and c values of the unit cell - I am not sure how much bigger the unit cell of Re is compared to cobalt. I have tried to look for a Re-Fe phase diagram with no luck. I would suspect that it would be similar to a Co-Fe phase diagram, but with a smaller solid solubility. I imagine that it would make some interesting intermetallics that may form at the grain boundarys - and become brittle because of the intermetallics, and result in intergranular fracture (the rock candy fracture)....I really don't know. OK - I found a really small portion of a phase diagram - valid from 0-45at% of Re....looks like it is soluble in austenite up to about 5% at about 500C, then forms an intermetallic. I would then suspect that it would report to the grain boundaries, and become a brittling agent.... Scott
  15. I don't have a problem with that at all - my problem is marketing it like snake oil, and providing anecdotal stories instead of real research by independent people - instead of just hawking their wares..... There must be something to it - otherwise so many people wouldn't claim otherwise. Unless a whole lot of people are fooled by a bunch of placebos... Scott
  16. I got the paper - thank you. Essentially it described two mechanisms - first at -120F, the mechanism is conversion of retained austenite. At -320F, two mechanisms: the transformation of retained austenite to martensite, and the second is the precipitation of fine eta carbides between the larger carbides. He also indicated in passing that there may be a stress relief occurring. I am not happy with the explanation given - doesn't sound correct about carbon finding more preferred sites....the low energy sites are the intersitial ones - where the carbon is already residing. I need to do some research on the formation of eta carbides and the likely hood of it happening at -320F. I have never disagreed with the premise that -120 F would work. Nor particularly at -320 F (mostly due to conversion of retained austenite) - but I am not sure of the precipitation of eta carbides. Perhaps because of the lower temperatures, the precipitation of the carbides occurs from the conversion of retained austenite.....and the associated carbide precipitation.
  17. BTW, my email address is kb0fhp@comcast.net
  18. Any chance you could post the article? I would really be interested in reading it. Thank you Scott
  19. Whale oil was used a lot immediately before 1920. The problem was a shortage of whales, and the expense of the oil. THis was until alternative oils came out in the late 20s
  20. I would be interested in reading Dr Batson's article. Since the carbon in any steel is located in the intersitial spaces, I am a bit confused about it finding a preferred space. Cryo does work in converting retained austenite - all that is required is to use a temperature a bit below the Mf temperature. For alloys like 4340, 300M and HP9-430 (9% Ni, 4% Co, 0.30%C) - used in landing gear, as well as the newer AerMet 100 and AF1410, the temperatures are -100F for 24 hours. I depends on the steel - if it has a lot of nickel - then it would be a likely choice for a retained austenite treatment. Otherwise I would save my money. Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who REALLY believe - even to the point of fanaticism....and can't listen to reason, or independent study. My mind is not made up - but I need to be shown valid, peer reviewed literature to show that it works. Scott BTW, for an interesting discussion of cryo treatment (that got a little heated) look at : http://forums.swordforum.com/showthread.ph...;highlight=cyro BTW - serveral questions I posed were never answered.... Scott
  21. There are multiple quenchants that can be used - one effective one is the use of salts (about 10%)....it has the effect of breaking up the vapor barrior and nucleating the boiling phase. Use of any carbonated drink, or water for that matter, would have the effect of creating a very long and stable vapor phase. There are some applications that this may work for reducing residual stresses, but steel isn't one of them. There are still places in the US that quench in lead - for wire drawing and other applications that are similar. Scott
  22. A quick search using Google and "snake oil" will uncover multiple references to cyro treatment.... (That ought to start some flames!)....just kidding. The use of a sub-zero treatment - typically 24 hours at -100F is very effective in reducing retained austenite. It is a standard practice for aerospace steels, or those that are prone to retained austenite. THe times and temperatures vary a bit, but this is the essential process. It does work. There have been claims that cryo sweetens the tone of brass instruments, reduces stresses, or cures global warming. Most claims are anecdotal, and do not have independent research or study behind them to validate the claims. At the present time, any claim other than reducing retained austenite is bogus. IMHO Scott
  23. Mike - it is straight forward. Look at the Fe-C phase diagram. There is a range of chemistries that have Fe+C and then there is pure graphite. The graphite will diffuse into the melt up to the equilibrium limit. If you want a chemical equation, it is 3Fe +C(graphite) = Fe3C. You can simply prove this yourself. Take a graphite crucible, and fill it with pure iron, or low carbon steel. Cover the crucible to prevent oxygen making CO and CO2. Heat slowly to different temperatures. After a period of time - you will carburize your steel. Heat up til melt and hold for a period of time, then cool. Measure the carbon content - it will have increased......
  24. OK - Check out the book "Foundry Engineering", by Flemings, Taylor and Wolf.... At a given chemistry, you can have either white iron or gray iron - the difference is the cooling rate. Cooled rapidly, you get white iron. Cooled more slowly you get gray iron. Refer to the diagram on page 98. I wish I had a scanner available now - I would include it. If you take white iron and heat it up and hold it isothermally for a long time, then the graphite will precipitate out and form malleable iron... Consider the same melt - if you add graphite, there is a solubility of graphite in liquid iron. Some of the graphite would dissolve in the melt, while some would remain as graphite - according to the equilibrium diagram. So it is possible for additions of graphite to increase the carbon content of a melt. Hope this helps eliminate any confusion. Scott
  25. I would be interested in seeing the macro of that ingot that has been sectioned....easily done with nital or ferric chloride - but lightly....that way you could get an idea of the segregation present...and all sorts of other stuff.... Scott
  • Create New...