2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.08.035
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prediction of hardness at different points of Jominy specimen using quench factor analysis method

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 38 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…where C t is critical time required to transform a constant amount of ferrite, pearlite or bainite. K 1 is a constant which equals the natural logarithm of the volume fraction for untransformed austenite, K 2 is a constant related to the reciprocal of the number of nucleation sites, K 3 is a constant related to the energy (J/mol) required to form a nucleus, K 4 is a constant related to the carbon solvus temperature (Ac 3 ) and K 5 is a constant related to the activation energy for diffusion [12]. R is 8.3143 J/K•mol as gas constant and T is the average temperature (K) between time increments.…”
Section: Methodology For Hardness Predictionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…where C t is critical time required to transform a constant amount of ferrite, pearlite or bainite. K 1 is a constant which equals the natural logarithm of the volume fraction for untransformed austenite, K 2 is a constant related to the reciprocal of the number of nucleation sites, K 3 is a constant related to the energy (J/mol) required to form a nucleus, K 4 is a constant related to the carbon solvus temperature (Ac 3 ) and K 5 is a constant related to the activation energy for diffusion [12]. R is 8.3143 J/K•mol as gas constant and T is the average temperature (K) between time increments.…”
Section: Methodology For Hardness Predictionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the same years, a method bases on quench factor analysis [27] was proposed to estimate the hardenability profile from simulated cooling curves, which shows good accuracy mostly for high hardness values. [28] In general, it can be observed that "traditional" numerical models estimating the hardenability curve show good performances only on a narrow range of steel grades considered for the tuning of their parameters, but their generalization properties are quite poor when applied for other grades, as the formulas correlating such parameters with the steel metallurgy are often empirical and hard to extend. Furthermore, often only some points of the profile are estimated with good accuracy, as the interactions among alloying elements are insufficiently addressed, also because they still are not fully known.…”
Section: Doi: 101002/srin202300374mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A different approach from Yazdi et al [28] involves the quench factor analysis (QFA), a proven technique introduced in the early seventies and improved in 1993 by Rometsch et al [29], which correlates the cooling curves to metallurgical response. QFA is applied to estimate hardness from simulated cooling curves, by providing a good correlation between predicted and measured hardness.…”
Section: Data-driven Approaches To Forecast Steel Hardenabilitymentioning
confidence: 99%