Industrial Heating Magazine


 Home
 Subscribe
 eNews Subscribe
 Subscription Customer Service
 FORGExpo
 Searchable Directories
 In This Issue
 Features
 Columns
 Industry News
 Products
 Tech Literature
 Online Resources
 Webinars
 FORGExpo
 Archives
 The Experts Speak Blog
 IH TV
 Podcasts
 White Papers
 Classified Ads
 Industry Links
 Market Research
 FORGE Magazine
 IH Info
 Media Kit
Search in: EditorialProductsCompanies
A Pictorial Comparison of Nitriding and Carburizing
by Daniel H. Herring
May 12, 2010

ARTICLE TOOLS
EmailEmailPrintPrintReprintsReprintsshareShare



Enlarge this picture
Figure 1. How gears fail - factors influencing gear performance[1]
Questions:
It seems to me that all the articles I read about the low-pressure, vacuum carburizing process compare it only to conventional atmosphere carburizing. I am curious why I never see a comparison to controlled gas nitriding? I can understand why if we were to look only at plain carbon steels, for example, which cannot be effectively nitrided, but many (if not all) of the materials run in the low-pressure carburizing process are highly alloyed materials that, I assume, would easily nitride after heat treating and finish machining. Can you straighten me out on this?


Enlarge this picture
Figure 2. Gear design considerations – areas of maximum stress[1]
Answer:
You raise an interesting point. I assume one of the reasons that low-pressure, vacuum carburizing is compared most often to atmosphere carburizing is that they are technologies that more directly compete with one another. In some products (common rail fuel-injection systems come to mind), there is a movement away from vacuum carburizing and back to gas nitriding.


Enlarge this picture
Figure 3. AGMA gear rating system[2]
I've put together some excerpts from several recent gear presentations to show you an example of how nitrided gears compare to carburized gears.

Major failure modes in gears can be traced to: (a) wear, (b) scoring, (c) profile pitting, (d) tooth breakage and (e) spalling.


Enlarge this picture
Figure 4. Sca AGMA allowable contact-stress number (from AGMA 2001-C95)[2]


Enlarge this picture
Figure 5. Typical gear tooth hardness profiles[2]


Daniel H. Herring
dherring@heat-treat-doctor.com
Dan Herring is president of THE HERRING GROUP Inc., which specializes in consulting services (heat treatment and metallurgy) and technical services (industrial education/training and process/equipment assistance. He is also a research associate professor at the Illinois Institute of Technology/Thermal Processing Technology Center.

References
1. Herring, D. H., Effective Heat Treating & Hardening of Gears, SME Short Course, AGMA Fall Technical Meeting, October 2007.

2. Weires, Dale, Effective Heat Treating & Hardening of Gears, SME Short Course, AGMA Fall Technical Meeting, October 2007.


  Comments (0)Post a Comment
 

No HTML or BBCode in comments please.
 







BNP Media

© 2010 BNP Media. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy