Materials Science and Engineering A 480 (2008) 209217

Predictive modeling of multi-track laser hardening

of AISI 4140 steel
Ritesh S. Lakhkar
a
, Yung C. Shin
a,
, Matthew John M. Krane
b
a
School of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN 47907, United states
b
School of Materials Engineering, Purdue University, W. Lafayette, IN 47907, United States
Received 30 March 2007; accepted 5 July 2007
Abstract
Laser hardening provides benets over the conventional hardening processes, including minimum distortion in the parts and the absence of a
quenchant. This process is also faster than conventional hardening processes and can be used for selective hardening of specic areas of components.
One known problem with laser hardening in steels, however, is back tempering when a large area is hardened by multiple, overlapping passes.
This study focused on the development of a numerical model to predict the back tempering in multi-track laser hardening. A tempering model was
combined with existing models of thermal behavior and phase change kinetics, which were developed earlier in the authors group, to predict three-
dimensional hardness proles after multiple track laser hardening. The combined model was rst validated through multi-track laser hardening
tests and then used to predict and optimize the laser hardened case depth in multi-track laser hardening of AISI 4140 steel. The predictions and
parameters optimized to obtain maximum case depth with the least variation along width of the hardened zone were experimentally veried. Case
depths up to 2 mm were obtained with 5 mm overlapping of laser tracks.
2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Laser hardening; Back tempering; Multi-track hardening; Phase transformation; Modeling
1. Introduction
In recent years, lasers have proved to be an effective tool
for selective surface hardening. In laser hardening, a laser beam
delivers a large amount of heat to the surface of the material in
a short time. This heat is conducted into the bulk of the mate-
rial beneath the point on the surface where the laser beam is
incident. The surface is heated quickly and then quenched by
the bulk of the material and air. If heated for long enough and
cooled quickly enough, a hardened layer forms. Steels and cast
irons are good candidates for simple laser hardening because of
their good hardenability [1]. Laser hardening has some inherent
benets, including no need of a quenchant and the minimization
of distortions due to thermal stresses.
Despite these advantages, widespread use of laser hardening
has been limited by the low absorptivity of metals to laser radi-
ation. The most widely used lasers have been CO
2
lasers, with
a wavelength of 10.6 m, but the normal absorptivity of metals

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 765 494 9775/6900; fax: +1 765 494 0539.
E-mail address: shin@ecn.purdue.edu (Y.C. Shin).
at that wavelength is very low [2]. Recently, the introduction
of high power lasers with different wavelengths, e.g., Nd:YAG
or diode lasers, has made laser assisted hardening an attrac-
tive candidate for surface hardening processes. Steels exhibit
40% absorptivity for diode laser (0.8 m) radiation. In addition,
diode or Nd:YAGlasers are smaller in size and have better beam
delivery systems as compared to CO
2
lasers. Rectangular beam
proles are readily available with diode lasers, providing uni-
form heat ux over a large area, thus making laser hardening
faster and more uniform.
Many studies have been made to assist the design of laser
hardening processes and to improve the understanding of the
underlying physics. Shercliff and Ashby [3] developed an
approximate heat ow model, based on Ashby and Easterlings
[4] model for laser hardening, to determine critical values of
dimensionless parameters to predict the laser operating condi-
tions for hardening and to determine the case depth. Yang et al.
[5] and Yang and Na [6] developed process charts in terms of
dimensionless parameters comprising of laser beam size, scan-
ning rate and power to dene a relationship between power
density and interaction time for tool steels, and proposed an
empirical relation to predict the case depth in laser hardening.
0921-5093/$ see front matter 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.msea.2007.07.054
210 R.S. Lakhkar et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 480 (2008) 209217
But these dimensionless parameters which were based on cir-
cular Gaussian beam were not applicable to the diode laser set
up with a rectangular top hat proled beam. An attempt was
made by Galantucci and Tricario [7] to use a diode laser in laser
hardening and develop a numerical model to predict the tem-
perature distribution in the material. Tian et al. [8] developed a
numerical heat transfer model for laser heating with an arbitrary
beamprole to predict the temperature distribution in a nite at
workpiece by taking into account convection and radiation heat
transfer and temperature dependence of the thermal properties
of the material. This model was based on energy diffusion for
three-dimensional transient conduction.
Skvarenina and Shin [9] developed a two-dimensional kinetic
model, which addressed some of the issues such as prediction of
case depthintwo-dimensions. This model was basedonthe work
done by Ashby and Easterling [4], Inoue et al. [10] and Ohmura
et al. [11]. The latter two groups of researchers developed
multidimensional carbon diffusion models for laser hardening
of steels. Skvarenina and Shin [9] successfully predicted and
experimentally achieved a case depth of 2.5 mm with uniform
hardness of 57 HRC in the AISI 1536 steel cylinder of 60 mm
diameter with 2.9 mm/s scanning speed and 1220 W diode laser
power. Laser hardening of a complex feature, viz., a 2 mm deep
groove on a cylindrical workpiece, with a case depth of 1.5 mm
beneath the groove with uniform hardness of 55 HRC, was pre-
dicted and experimentally achieved by Skvarenina and Shin [9].
One of the limiting factors that prevented the extensive use of
laser hardening in industry has been back tempering of hardened
tracks in multi-track laser hardening. When multiple laser tracks
are used, the later trackcauses the backtemperingof the previous
tracks, leading to non-uniformhardness proles and case depths
[12]. Lin and Ericsson [13] carried out studies on effects of over-
lapped tracks on fatigue property of cylindrical workpieces of
steels similar to AISI 4140. The hardening process was carried
out by moving a round focusing spot of 5 mmalong a spiral track
which caused an overlapping zone of about 2.1 mm. This laser
hardening was carried out using 1100 Wto 1300 Wpower with a
CO
2
laser with a scan speed of 3.13.6 m/min and a feed rate of
3.5 mm/turn. A maximum case depth of 0.46 mm was obtained
with a peak hardness value of 750 HV. However, degree of uni-
formity of hardness prole was not measured by them. They
concluded that overlapping of tracks increases the fatigue life
of the material due to the compressive surface stresses devel-
oped during laser hardening. A 2 mm case depth was achieved
by Ehlers et al. [14] with hardness near 750 HV in 4140 steel
with operating conditions optimized to achieve maximum case
depth.
Cracking and cavitation are dependent on the extent of over-
lapping of laser-hardened tracks. Pantelis et al. [15] showed that
using 038% overlapping ratios in multi-track laser hardening
improves the wear and corrosion resistance of CK60 structural
steel compared to that with un-overlapped tracks. Corrosion
resistance depends upon the hardness and the microstructure
of the steel. Lower overlapping ratios produced non-uniform
proles with soft spots in the overlapped zones. The issue of
back tempering involved in multiple track laser hardening was
not addressed. Li et al. [16] were among the rst to incorporate
multi-track laser hardening in their research. They reported pres-
ence of soft band zone in hardness between two overlapped scans
of laser beam. Yang et al. [5] calculated the residual stresses in
multi-pass laser hardening. They concluded that the residual
tensile stress is present on the hardened surface, if the distance
between the adjacent laser passes is larger than the width of each
laser pass.
Even though some studies of multi-track laser hardening
have been done, no numerical model has been developed to
predict the case depth prole, hardness values and back tem-
pering effects in multi-track laser hardening. While Skvarenina
and Shins [9] model is helpful in determining the hardness
prole of a single laser hardened track, there is a need for a
numerical model for back tempering to predict nal hardness
proles in multi-track laser hardening. Availability of such a
model will be useful in designing the laser overlapping patterns
and operating conditions to achieve uniform hardness and case
depth. The model in this study is used for laser hardening of
AISI 4140, ubiquitous alloy steel. The integrated model consist-
ing of a three-dimensional transient temperature model and a
kinetic hardeningtempering model is developed to predict the
case depth, hardening and back tempering effects in multi-track
laser hardening of AISI 4140 steel.
2. Thermal model
The primary heat transfer phenomena that inuence the laser
heating of prismatic parts of 4140 steel are (1) the partial absorp-
tion of laser beamirradiation on the metal surface; (2) convective
heat transfer fromthe heated spot to the air jet; (3) radiation heat
transfer fromthe heated surface to the surroundings; (4) convec-
tive and radiation heat transfer from the nonheated surfaces to
the surroundings; and (5) conduction of the heat away from the
heated surface into the bulk material. Temperature dependent
thermophysical property data are incorporated into the model in
order to provide improved conditions. The experimental cong-
uration for laser hardening includes a stationary workpiece and
a translating laser, as shown in Fig. 1, traveling along Xdirection
Fig. 1. Set up for laser hardening of a prismatic part.
R.S. Lakhkar et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 480 (2008) 209217 211
at a given Y location. The workpiece area is dened such that it
is affected by heat conduction away from the heated region. The
model for laser-assisted heating, developed by Tian et al. [8], is
solved using an implicit nite difference method for transient
conduction and uses top hat rectangular beam shape.
The prismatic model for laser heating is based on the energy
conservation equation for three-dimensional transient conduc-
tion
h(T)
t
=

x

k(T)
T
x

+

y

k(T)
T
y

+

z

k(T)
T
z

,
(1)
where the term on the left hand side represents energy storage,
and the three terms on the right hand side stand for thermal
diffusion in x, y and z directions, respectively. Specic heat and
thermal conductivity are temperature dependent and isotropic.
The thermal model predicts the three-dimensional temper-
ature distributions within the workpiece during laser heating.
Various operatingparameters, suchas laser power, scanningrate,
absorptivity of the material, emissivity and thermal properties
of the material are dened by the user.
3. Kinetic hardeningtempering model
3.1. Hardening model
A numerical model was developed by Skvarenina and
Shin [9] to predict the hardness and hardened zone in
a two-dimensional plane in laser assisted hardening. The
microstructure is modeled using a micrograph of the real
microstructure as the initial condition. The calculation domain
is divided into cells and a phase, or combination of phases, is
associated with each phase (e.g., austenite, pearlite, martensite).
The distance over which the carbon diffuses is given by
L = 2

t
2
t
1
D
0
exp

Q
RT(t)

dt, (2)
where D is the diffusion coefcient, L the radius of the pearlite
colony, and is the average plate spacing in the colony.
It is assumed that the homogenization of austenite is gov-
erned by solute diffusion and hence Ficks 2nd law of diffusion
is used to model this transformation. This calculation is per-
formed solely over the , and / interface cells and starts and
ends at the eutectoid temperature [9]. The homogenization of
austenite occurs at temperature above AC
3
and by the time AC
3
temperature is reached, all of cementite from pearlite decom-
poses to form austenite. The diffusion of carbon is governed by
Ficks 2nd law
C

t
=

x

+

y

, (3)
where C

is the carbon concentration in phase (either or )

and D

is the related diffusion coefcient, which is a function

of concentration and temperature.
The detailed procedure to calculate the carbon concentration
in various phases, the solution of Eq. (3) and degree of homog-
enization of austenite is explained by Skvarenina and Shin [9].
The diffusion coefcients of carbon in austenite and ferrite are
given by
D

(T) = D
0
exp

RT

. (4)
where D
0
is the pre-exponential of the diffusion coefcient for
phase , Q

the activation energy of phase , R the universal

gas constant, and T is the temperature in Kelvin. If the austenite
cells or any other boundary (multiple phase) cells contain more
than 0.05% carbon [4] after the thermal cycle and associated
austenite homogenization has completed, then those cells are
assumed to transform to martensite. This assumption holds for
laser hardening as cooling rates of the order greater than 10
4
C/s
are encountered in laser surface hardening [4]. The hardness of
a subsection of the domain (dened by 100 cells of the kinetics
grid) is thenassignedbaseduponthe mass fractions of martensite
(f) and ferrite (1 f)
H = fH
m
+(1 f)H
f
(5)
H
f
is the hardness of ferrite, taken to be 150 HV [4], while
the hardness of the martensite is found from
H
m
= 1667C 926
C
2
f
+150, (6)
where C is the carbon content of the steel.
3.2. Back tempering model
If an area of a width larger than the width of the laser beam
has to be covered, multiple tracks of the laser beam have to
be used. There has been substantial research in the hardness
and microstructure prediction areas related to conventional tem-
pering and annealing processes [17,18] which proved useful in
addressing back tempering in laser hardening.
The consequence of the back tempering process depends on
the distribution of microstructure present after the rst laser pass
and the temperature history in the tempering pass. Given these
data, the model used for conventional tempering and anneal-
ing by Zhang et al. [18] can be adapted to predict the hardness
changes during the second laser pass. Some key assumptions of
this model are:
The beam that overlaps or passes near the rst beam track
partially tempers the material, if the phase in the overlapped
zone is martensite and temperature point is less than AC
1
and
greater than 100

C.
Tempering may form two phases:
- -carbide is formed between 100

C and 250

C;
- tempered martensite is formed between 250

Cand 727

C.
If the phase fraction of martensite in the overlapped zone is
more than the non-martensitic phase fraction, the resultant
hardness is given by hardness calculated by the hardening
model [9], otherwise hardness is determined by considering
martensite and tempered phase fractions.
212 R.S. Lakhkar et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 480 (2008) 209217
The fraction of martensite that has transformed during tem-
pering is modeled by the JohnsonMehlAvarami equation,
which is given as
f = 1 exp(
n
) (7)
where
= kt = k
0
t exp

Q
RT

(8)
and Q is the activation energy, and n and k
0
are empirically
derived constants. This equation is applicable only to isothermal
conditions, which is not the case in laser back tempering which
exhibits a fast temperature rise and quench. Therefore, must
be taken according to the time variation of temperature in the
laser hardening process. The change in with time, including
transient temperature effects, is
d
dt
= k +t
dk
dT
dT
dt
= k +
Q
RT
2

dT
dt
, (9)
which was solved by a Runge Kutta 4th order method. These
equations can be applied to predict the tempered hardness
in overlapped tracks in laser-assisted hardening. The thermal
model provides a temperature history at every point in the over-
lapped region.
Anumerical code basedonabove equations was developed, to
determine the hardness after tempering. The resultant hardness
is calculated from a weighted average of various phase fractions
that are present in the tempered material. Various phases that
may be present in tempered material may include -carbide (),
ferrite (f), cementite (c) and martensite (m). The presence of
retained austenite was ignored due to its assumed small mass
fraction (<0.1).
It was assumed that in laser hardening time scales, for temper-
atures less than 250

C martensite may transform to -carbide

and ferrite and the carbon mass balance can be represented by
C
material
= f
m
C
m
+[f

+f

], (10)
where C represents the percentage of carbon in the phase. For
AISI 4140 steel
C
material
= C
m
= 0.4, (11)
Because
f
m
= 1 f, (12)
fC
material
= fC
m
= f

+f

. (13)
Substituting Eq. (12) in Eq. (13) yields
fC
m
= (1 f

)C

+f

(14)
where C

and C

are known quantities.

f

=
fC
m
C

(15)
and
f

= f f

(16)
The carbon content of the -carbide (C

) is 8.55 wt%for Fe
2.3
C,
8.22 wt% for Fe
2.4
C, and 7.92 wt% for Fe
2.5
C.
The maximum solubility of carbon in ferrite is 0.008% for
temperatures less than 400

C and 0.022% at 727

C (the eutec-
toid temperature), and it is varied linearly in between those
temperatures. Above 250

C, the mass fractions of ferrite and

cementite can be determined by
f
c
=
fC
m
C

C
f
C

(17)
f

= f f
c
. (18)
The mass fraction of carbon in cementite (Fe
3
C) is 6.7 wt%.
Once all the phase fractions are calculated, the hardness of the
material at each point in the calculation domain after tempering
is calculated by a weighted average
H = H
Martensite
f
m
+H
Carbide
f

+H
Ferrite
f

+H
Cementite
f
c
. (19)
4. Property data of AISI 4140 steel
The thermal conductivity, specic heat, transformation tem-
peratures and other constants are required to model laser
hardening of AISI 4140 steel. Martensite transformation
temperatures for AISI 4140 steel are M
Start
=337

C and
M
Finish
=218

C [24]. The temperature dependence of thermal

conductivity is based on data gathered from Thomas et al. [19]
k =(10
5
)T
2
0.0333T+54.904 W/(mK) (T1400 K)
k =30.0 W/(mK) (T>1400 K)
The specic heat of AISI 4140 steel was obtained from
Matweb [24] and was divided into three temperature ranges:
C
p
=473.0 J/(kg K) (T378 K)
C
p
=1.43E-08 T
4
+3.99E-
05 T
3
0.0395 T
2
+16.844 T2109 J/(kg K),
(378 <T1250 K)
C
p
=607.0 J/(kg K). (T>1250 K)
Other constants used in the kinetic models are given in
Table 1.
5. Optimized parameters and experimental results
The kinetics models developed for multi-track laser harden-
ing were used in conjunction with temperature predictions to
determine the case depths and overlapping pattern for harden-
ing of AISI 4140 steel. The objectives of the multi-pass laser
hardening were (1) to achieve a case depth of 2 mm with a hard-
ness value higher than 50 HRC in laser hardened tracks in AISI
4140 steel, (2) to determine an optimum overlapping pattern
for multiple laser hardened tracks without a signicant loss of
hardness due to back tempering, and (3) to experimentally vali-
date the predicted results of multi-track laser hardening of AISI
R.S. Lakhkar et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 480 (2008) 209217 213
Table 1
Constants used in diffusion model [4,9,2023]
Property Value
Pre-exponential (carbon in ferrite), D
0
6 10
5
m
2
/s
Pre-exponential (carbon in austenite), D
0
l 10
5
m
2
/s
Activation energy (ferrite), Q

80 kJ/mol
Activation energy (austenite), Q

135 kJ/mol
Universal gas constant, R 8.314 J/molK
Pearlite grain spacing, 0.5 m
Diameter of pearlite grain, L 8.85 m
Average grain size, g 13.6 m
Volume fraction of pearlite, f 0.45
Critical carbon content value, C
c
0.05%
Activation Energy (martensite for tempering) Q 196.888 kJ/mol
Pre-exponential, n 0.109
K
0
51.111 10
8
s
1
Maximum hardness of martensite, H
martensite
700.00 HV
Maximum hardness of -carbide, H
-carbide
600.00 HV
Maximum hardness of ferrite, H
ferrite
150.00 HV
Maximum hardness of cementite, H
cementite
400.00 HV
4140 steel. The main factor inuencing the back tempering is
the extent of overlapping of the heated regions under the laser
tracks. In order to determine the optimum operating conditions
to maximize (at least obtain 2 mm) the case depth and reduce
back tempering a two step approach was used.
In the rst step, the multi-track laser hardening process was
simulated to nd an operating condition to maximize the case
depth. Using these operating parameters for the laser, the multi-
track laser hardening process was simulated by varying the
extent of overlapping of tracks. The simulation matrix used to
determine the laser parameters for maximumcase depthis shown
in Table 2. A Nuvonyx 4 KW ISL 4000-L diode laser of wave-
length of 0.808 m was used in laser hardening of 4140 steel.
This laser has a rectangular beamshape of 12 mm8 mmwhen
used with focusing lens. The laser power was varied from800 W
to 1200 W, while the scanning rate was varied from 0.3 mm/s
through 2 mm/s. The workpieces used had the dimensions of
76.2 mm50.8 mm25.4 mm. The initial phase distributions
for the simulations were obtained from a micrograph of unhard-
ened AISI 4140 steel. After examining several such micrographs
of the as-received metal, it was determined that there were
no large-scale variations in the microstructure, with uniform
volume fractions of ferrite and pearlite at roughly 0.5 each.
A representative micrograph was taken and its phase distribu-
tion was repeated over the entire, much larger, computational
domain.
It is seen fromTable 2 that the thermal model predicts temper-
atures above the melting point of the AISI 4140 steel (1400

C)
for powers between 1000 W and 1200 W for an absorptivity
Table 2
Simulation matrix for determination of maximum case depth in laser hardening
of AISI 4140 steel
Test
no.
Power
(W)
Speed
(mm/s)
Maximum
temperature under
laser spot (C)
Depth of
hardened
zone (mm)
Melting
yes/no
1 1200 2 1431
a
Yes
2 1200 1 1457
a
Yes
3 1200 0.5 1610
a
Yes
4 1100 1 1344
a
Yes
5 1100 0.5 1477
a
Yes
6 1000 1 1448 NO
a
Yes
7 950 0.4 1361 1.91 No
8 950 0.3 1389 1.91
b
No
b
9 900 0.4 1354 1.89 No
10 850 0.5 1331 1.91 No
11 850 0.45 1344 1.9 No
12 850 0.4 1351 1.86 No
13 800 0.4 1245 1.7 No
14 800 0.3 1203 1.8 No
a
No hardened zone possible.
b
Close to melting temperature.
value of 0.69 and very close to it for 950 W and 0.3 mm/s.
These conditions are not appropriate for further study here due
to the possible remelting of the alloy. Operating conditions with
low power and high speed are advantageous, as long as there
is enough heat input to trigger austenization and formation of
martensite at the desired depth (>2 mm). Cases 711 all predict
a case depth of approximately 1.9 mm. Cases 10 and 11 (850 W,
0.5 and 0.45 mm/s) are better choices than cases 7 and 8 as they
are faster and use less power.
After taking into consideration limitations of the physical set-
up and governing factors for selection of optimum parameters
for laser hardening, it was concluded that 850 W, 0.5 mm/s scan-
ning rate, 12 mm8 mmdiode laser beamsize, and
steel
=0.69
were good choices for parameters for modeling multi-track laser
hardening. During multi-track laser hardening of a large area,
laser tracks should be overlapped in such a manner that the hard-
ened zones created by them are uniform and there is minimum
difference between the depths of the tracks. The entire hard-
ened zone produced by the multiple tracks ideally should have
a uniform case depth. In order to analyze the effects of differ-
ent degrees of overlap, the optimum operating parameters for
the laser were used to simulate the multi-track laser harden-
ing process using the coupled hardening-tempering model. The
simulation conditions used in this study are shown in Table 3.
The overlap of the laser tracks was varied from 3 mm through
6 mm (the 12 mm axis of the laser beam was perpendicular to
the direction of laser travel, so half of the beam width was inci-
Table 3
Simulation matrix to determine optimum overlapping condition
Test no. Power (W) Overlap (mm) Speed (mm/s) Maximum temperature under laser spot (C) Depth of hardened zone (mm) Melting yes/no
1 850 6 0.5 1331 1.9 No
2 850 5 0.5 1331 1.9 No
3 850 4 0.5 1331 1.9 No
4 850 3 0.5 1331 1.9 No
214 R.S. Lakhkar et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 480 (2008) 209217
Fig. 2. Comparison of hardness prole along width of the laser hardened area
for different overlaps.
dent on previously covered surface when a 6 mm overlap was
used). The hardness variation over the entire width of the laser
hardened zone at a depth of 0.25 mm was predicted using the
conditions shown in Table 3 and is shown in Fig. 3.
It is seen from Fig. 2 that the 5 mm overlap leads to the least
drop in the hardness of the material in the overlapped zone,
(Table 4) while track overlap of 3 mm produces an unhardened
zone inbetweenthe twotracks. As the extent of overlapincreases
up to 5 mm, the minimum hardness in the overlapped zone also
increases up to 470 HV, whereas overlapping above 5 mm leads
todropinthe lowest hardness value inthe overlappedregion. The
predicted hardness varies from the bulk hardness of the material
to the maximum value of 668 HV. Thus it can be concluded
that the optimum overlapping for multi-track laser hardening is
5 mm.
The simulated conditions found in tests 2 and 4 (Table 3)
were used in two experiments to check the validity of the model,
while a third experiment was performed for test 2 to check
repeatability.
Sandblasted AISI 4140 steel workpieces of
76.2 mm50.8 mm25.4 mm dimensions were cut and
mounted on an insulative material. The diode laser was
maneuvered using a Panasonic VR-016 welding robot. The
laser beam was turned on outside the workpiece area so that a
steady state of diode laser emission at designated power was
reached before the hardening process. The start point of the
second laser track was approximately 5 mm away from the
edge of the workpiece. After making two overlapping tracks,
the specimen was cross-sectioned approximately 89 mm away
from the start point of the second laser track. Temperatures in
the workpiece were measured using the FLIR ThermaCAM SC
3000 infrared camera. The cross-sectional area of the specimen
Table 4
Experimental matrix for validation of predictions of multi-track laser hardening
of AISI 4140 steel
Test # Power Overlap Notes
1 850 5
2 850 5 Repeatability test
3 850 4 Change in laser overlap
Fig. 3. Phase plot of cross-section of laser hardened tracks of test 1 in Table 4.
was ground and polished and etched with a 5% Nital solution
and optical micrographs were made of the microstructures in
the rst track, second track, overlapped zone and transition
zone. The hardness of the samples was then measured.
The predicted phase plot of test 1 is shown in Fig. 3, while
the corresponding micrograph of the actual laser hardened sam-
ple is shown in Fig. 4. It is seen from Fig. 3 that a case depth
of approximately 1.9 mm was predicted, while the experiment
showed a depth of 2.0 mm. The width of the laser-hardened
tracks was approximately 18 mm, while the width of the over-
lapped hardened zone was approximately 2 mm. The difference
in the maximumcase depth of the two tracks was approximately
0.2 mm. The transition zone in each track was disregarded as
formation of transition zone was not modeled in [9] when cal-
culating the case depth. As seen in Figs. 3 and 4, the shape
and size of the predicted and measured overlapped zones match
well with each other. In the predicted hardened zone prole, a
split is observed in the overlapped zone, which is present due to
the transition zone of the second track and re-hardening of the
portion of the rst track. It is observed in Fig. 3 that the por-
tion of the rst track in the overlapped zone is re-hardened by
the overlapped second track and it conrms the prediction. The
prole of the overlapped zone that was predicted by the kinetic
hardeningtempering model matched with the observed prole
of the overlapped zone.
Optical micrographs of the phases present in tracks 1 and
2, the overlapped zone and the transition zone (at the edge of
the case depth) are also shown in Fig. 4. The microstructure
in the unhardened zone, Fig. 4(a), contains ferrite and pearlite.
The laser-hardened track 2, Fig. 4(b), contains martensite, while
tempered martensite is present in the back-tempered region,
Fig. 4(d), in track 1 near track 2. The transition zone of track
2, Fig. 4(c), contains bainite, ferrite and pearlite. The boundary
between the tracks 1 and 2 in the overlapped zone, Fig. 4(e)
clearly shows newly formed martensite in track 2 and tempered
martensite in track 1.
The predicted hardness prole of the cross-section is shown
in Fig. 5. Hardness was measured along the width of the laser-
hardened zone at the depth of 0.15 mmbelowthe surface (Fig. 6).
The measurements into the depth (away from the surface) at
the approximate centers of rst and second tracks are shown
in Figs. 7 and 8, respectively, showing that the measurements
are repeatable. Hardness was also measured into the depth in
track 1 near the edge of the track 2 (Fig. 9) and also along the
R.S. Lakhkar et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 480 (2008) 209217 215
Fig. 4. Microstructures in the hardened zone in test 1 of Table 4: (a) ferrite and pearlite, (b) martensite, (c) transition zone, (d) tempered martensite and (e) martensite
and tempered martensite in overlapped zone.
depth of the overlapped zone in track 2 (Fig. 10). All of these
gures show excellent agreement between the predictions and
measurements. The predicted hardness proles tend to have a
steeper gradient in hardness than the measured ones beyond the
case depth, because the transition zone has not been considered
in the kinetic model.
The predicted hardness prole into the depth in the over-
lapped zone of track 1 (Fig. 9), taken at approximately 1.5 mm
away from the right edge of track 2, shows an initial rise away
from the surface. This trend is expected as the material near
surface experiences a higher temperature longer and hence gets
tempered faster as compared to the material at the larger depths.
However, the measured hardness values are more uniformin this
case and decrease more slowly than the predictions.
Fig. 10 shows the hardness measurements along the depth
in the overlapped zone in track 2 at approximately 1 mm away
Fig. 5. Hardness prole of the test 1 in Table 4.
Fig. 6. Hardness prole at 0.15 mm below surface in test 1 in Table 4.
Fig. 7. Comparison of hardness prole in track 1 in tests 1 and 2 in Table 4.
216 R.S. Lakhkar et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 480 (2008) 209217
Fig. 8. Comparison of hardness prole in track 2 in tests 1 and 2 in Table 4.
Fig. 9. Hardness prole along the depth in overlapped zone in track 1 in test 1
in Table 4.
from the edge of track 2. The depth of overlapped zone at this
location is approximately 1.3 mmand it contains martensite. The
predicted and measured hardness values are in good agreement
with each other.
Fig. 11 shows hardness along a line 0.25 mm below the sur-
face when the overlap is decreased to 4 mm (test 3 in Table 3).
As expected, no signicant difference is noted in the maximum
case depth with the change to a smaller overlap, but there is a
large drop in hardness, nearly to the bulk hardness of the mate-
rial, at the intersection of the two tracks. Obviously, this feature
is not desirable and the larger overlap is necessary.
Fig. 10. Hardness prole along the depth in overlapped zone in track 2 in test 1
in Table 4.
Fig. 11. Hardness prole at 0.25 mm below surface in test 3 in Table 4.
6. Conclusions
A coupled heat transferhardeningtempering model was
developed to predict the hardness and phases in the back-
tempered zones during multi-track laser hardening of AISI 4140
steel. The back-tempering model can predict the volume fraction
of martensite that has beentemperedandthe correspondinghard-
ness values. The optimal overlap for uniform case depth during
multi-track laser hardening of AISI 4140 steel was determined
using the hardeningtempering model and experimentally ver-
ied. It was found that 850 W of diode laser beam irradiation
with a beam shape of 12 mm8 mm, with 5 mm overlapping
of laser tracks can produce a hardened case depth of 1.92 mm
without melting and a minimum loss of hardness in the back-
tempered zone. The maximum hardness achievable within the
material is approximately 668700 HV(58 HRC). The hardness
values varied between 480 HV(48 HRC) and 669 HV(58 HRC)
in the martensitic regions of tracks 1 and 2. The major portion
of the back tempered track was in the range of 480571 HV
(4855 HRC). The difference in the case depths of the two adja-
cent tracks was approximately 0.2 mm. The variation in hardness
could be controlled by changing the extent of overlapping of the
tracks.
Acknowledgement
This research was partially supported by the 21st Century
Research and Technology Fund and the National Science Foun-
dation (Grant No. IIP 0538786).
References
[1] K. Sridhar, A.S. Khanna, Laser surface heat treatment, 1998, pp. 69119,
ISBN 0-87180-665-2.
[2] F. Dausinger, M. Beck, J.H. Lee, E. Meiners, T. Rudlaff, J. Shen, J. Laser
Appl. 2 (1990) 1721.
[3] H. Shercliff, M. Ashby, Metall. Trans. A (Phys. Metall. Mater. Sci.) 22A
(No. 10) (1991) 24592466.
[4] M.F. Ashby, K.E. Easterling, Acta Metall. 32 (N. 11) (1984) 1935
1948.
[5] L.J. Yang, S. Jana, S.C. Tam, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 21 (1990) 119
130.
[6] Y.S. Yang, S.J. Na, Surf. Coatings Technol. 42 (1990) 165174.
[7] L.M. Galantucci, L. Tricario, Ann. CIRP 48/1 (1999) 155158.
R.S. Lakhkar et al. / Materials Science and Engineering A 480 (2008) 209217 217
[8] Y. Tian, B. Wu, Y.C. Shin, Proceedings of the MSEC2006, ASME Interna-
tional Conference on Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Paper No.
MSEC2006-21008, 2006.
[9] S. Skvarenina, Y.C. Shin, Surf. Coatings Technol. 201 (6) (2006)
22562269.
[10] K. Inoue, E. Ohmura, S. Ikuta, Trans. JWRI 16 (No. 1) (1987) 97101.
[11] E. Ohmura, K. Inoue, Y. Takamachi, JSME Int. J. I 34 (No. 4) (1991)
421429.
[12] Y. Iino, K. Shimoda, J. Mater. Sci. Lett. 6 (1987) 11931194.
[13] R. Lin Peng, T. Ericsson, Scand. J. Metall. 27 (No. 4) (1998) 180190.
[14] B. Ehlers, H. Herfurth, S. Heinemann, Proc. SPIE 3945 (2000) 6370.
[15] D.I. Pantelis, E. Bouyiouri, N. Kouloumbi, P. Vassiliou, A.
Koutscomichalis, Surf. Coatings Technol. 298 (2002) 125134.
[16] Z. Li, Q. Zheng, J. Li, W. Hu, H. Wang, H. Tian, J. Appl. Phys. 58 (No. 10)
(1985) 38603864.
[17] G.R. Speich, W.C. Leslie, Metall. Trans. 3 (1972) 10431054.
[18] Z. Zhang, D. Delagnes, G. Bernhart, Mater. Sci. Eng. A 380 (No. 12)
(2004) 222230.
[19] R. Thomas, M. Ganesa-Pillai, P.B. Aswath, K.L. Lawrence, A. Haji-Sheikh,
Metall. Mater. Trans. A 29A (1998) 1485.
[20] Internet website www.matweb.com.
[21] G.A. Torpanova, Met. Sci. Heat Treat. 2 (No. 4) (1960) 1922.
[22] A.A. Getman, S.E. Snopkov, Met. Sci. Heat Treat. 10 (No. 5) (1968)
386388.
[23] N.Y. Taran, V.I. Novik, Met. Sci. Heat Treat. 13 (No.10) (1971) 818820.
[24] S. Ma, Mater. Sci. Eng., MSThesis, Worchester Polytechnic Institute, 2002.