High-Speed Steels Produced by Conventional Casting, Spray Forming and Powder Metallurgy

Article Preview

Abstract:

Powder metallurgy (PM) and spray forming (SF) have been reported as important alternative routes for tool steel production. The ability to promote refined and more uniform microstructures is their main advantages, leading to improved properties and larger isotropy. While PM application is a completely established technology, the SF process may be considered as a not totally explored field. Therefore, the present work aimed to study the potential of both processes, focusing at high-speed steel (HSS) production. AISI M3:2 highspeed steel was produced by conventional casting, spray forming and powder metallurgy. Conventional ingots and a 400 mm diameter SF billet were rolled to small diameter bars, with cross section around 110 mm. The PM material was evaluated in the as-HIPed condition, in comparative diameters. Large diameter HSS bars are used mainly in cutting tools, but are also applied in cold work tooling when high wear resistance is required. In the present characterisation, microstructures and bend test analysis were used, both in transverse and longitudinal directions. The results show that the as-HIPed PM material presents finer and more uniform carbide distribution, leading to a complete isotropy and higher toughness than conventional steel. In the SF material, carbides are also finer, have good distribution and the isotropy is considerably higher than that for conventional HSS.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Info:

Periodical:

Materials Science Forum (Volumes 498-499)

Pages:

244-250

Citation:

Online since:

November 2005

Export:

Price:

[1] G. Hoyle, in High Speed Steels. E. Butterworths, 1988, p.2.

Google Scholar

[2] M. Boccalini and H. Goldenstein, Int. Mater. Reviews, 46 (2001) pp.92-115.

Google Scholar

[3] H. F. Fishimeister et. al., Powder Metallurgy 25 (1982), p.1.

Google Scholar

[4] K. S. Kumar et. al., Met. Metall. Trans. A. 22 (1991), p.2747.

Google Scholar

[5] P. Hellman, Metal Powder Report. 47 (1992), p.25.

Google Scholar

[6] R. A. Mesquita and C. A. Barbosa, Mat. Sci. Forum 416-418, (2003), p.235.

Google Scholar

[7] Y. Ikawa et. al., ISIJ Int. 30 (1990), p.757.

Google Scholar

[8] K. H. Baik et. al, Proc. Third Int. Conference on Spray Forming (1996), p.251.

Google Scholar

[9] S. Annavarapu, D. Apelian and A. Lawley, Metall Trans. A 19 (1988), p.3077.

Google Scholar

[10] Sumitomo Ospreys Rolling Mill Rolls. Metal Powder Report December (1990), p.813.

DOI: 10.1016/0026-0657(90)90569-3

Google Scholar

[11] C. Spiegelhauer, Proc. 6th Int. Tooling Conference (2002), p.923.

Google Scholar

[12] A. G. Leatham, A. J. W. Ogilvy and P. F. Chesney. Modern Developments in Powder Metallurgy 18-21 (1988), p.475.

Google Scholar

[13] J. B. Forrest, R. R. Pratt and J. S. Combs, US Pat. 5. 472. 038, Osprey Metals LTD, 12 May (1995).

Google Scholar

[14] G. Hoyle et. al., J ISI, (1959), 44.

Google Scholar

[15] R. A. Mesquita and C. A. Barbosa, Proc. 55º Congresso Anual da ABM Brazil (2000), p.2017. (In Portuguese).

Google Scholar

[16] S. A. Horton and H. C. Child, Met. Tech. 10 (1983), p.245.

Google Scholar

[17] N. Lippmann and H. J. Spies, Proc. European Communities ECSC Inf. Day-Eng. Steels, Germany (1995), p.1.

Google Scholar

[18] Morris, Metal Sci. 16 (1982), p.457.

Google Scholar

[19] R. A. Mesquita and C. A. Barbosa, Proc. Spay Deposition and Melt Atomization 2003, Germany, 1 (2003) pp.5-87.

Google Scholar