HISTORY OF INTENSIVE QUENCHING

G.E. Totten1, N.I. Kobasko2, M.A. Aronov2, J. Powell2 and B. Ashraf1

1. G.E. Totten & Associates, Inc., Stony Point, NY
2. IQ Technologies Inc., Akron, OH

ABSTRACT
Various intensive quenching processes have been
reported since the 1920s. In this paper a
historical overview of these processes are
described. Based on the limited information that
has been published, it is likely that many of these
systems employed neither intensive quench
processing nor did they produce maximum
surface compressive stresses. A brief description
of
a
computer
simulation
process,
IntensiQuench(SM), which has been successfully
used in intensive quench process design is
provided.
INTRODUCTION
Every metallurgist has been trained that
increasing cooling rates, especially in the
martensitic transformation region, leads to
increasing potential for cracking as shown in
Figure 1 [1]. However, since the 1920s, there
have been various, often little-known industrial
heat treating processes
which have been
designated as intense, intensive, rapid, drastic,
severe, or extreme quenching or shell-hardening
methods [2-7,15]. The essence of these methods
is to harden less hardenable steels using very fast
cooling rates in order to impart high compressive
stresses and improved fatigue properties to the
quenched component [15]. Therefore, in view of
the classical training received by metallurgists,
why are these processes not accompanied by
quench cracking? In fact, what is intensive
quenching? Would you recognize it if you saw
it?
Figure 1 Quench cracking of 60SC7 steel
quenched in water. Decreasing cooling rates
were achieved by increasing water temperature.
In 1964, Kobasko published the first of an
extensive series of papers in which he used the
term Intensive Quenching and showed
experimental data which provided numerical
evidence that showed that although it is true that
increasing cooling rates result in increasing

propensity for cracking as historically

recognized, there does exist a critical cooling
rate above which cracking propensity decreases
as shown in Figure 2 [8]. Computer simulations
were later used to validate and to develop design

criteria for optimal conditions for conducting

intensive quenching processes [9, 10].
Subsequently, various industrial intensive
quenching processes were developed and
patented by Kobasko [11, 12].
Figure 2 - Effect of Cooling Rate on the
Probability of Cracking
In this paper, a brief and selected overview of a
number of historical intensive quenching
applications will be provided. Following this
discussion, the previous question will be
addressed: what is intensive quenching and how
do you know it when you see it? Finally, the
question of intensive quenching process design
will be briefly addressed.
DISCUSSION
A. Historical Examples
In USP 1,828,325, it was recognized that the
depth of hardening could be controlled

Crack Formation Probability, %

by spray pressure of cold water impinging on rail

steel and by the speed of the steel moving
through the spray zone [3]. No spray pressures
and quantitative measures quench severity were

uniformity. One patent, USP 3,515,601, reported

that there was a critical cooling rate but did
report what it was.
Morio discussed the necessity of hardening of
carbon or boron-containing carbon steels by
cold-water rapid-quenching process to achieve
the optimal as-quenched properties (high tensile
strength and good weldability) which are
superior to oil hardening [14]. However, it was
recognized rapid quenching leads to cracking
and increased distortion, although some control
is afforded through heat treat process and
component shape design.

75

50

25

200

400

6 00

800

C ooling R ate, C /s

provided. However, this seems to be one of the

earliest published references suggesting the
development of intensive quenching .
Kern reported that the first known example of
intense quenching was in the production of the
Ford Model T AISI 1035 rear axle [2] using a
hot solution of 5% aqueous caustic soda.
However, Kern also reported that the Ladish
Company used an intense quenching process
using vigorously agitated quench oil to produce
Rolls Royce P-51 engine crankshafts. The
problem with this application, when compared to
the Model T application, is at least two-fold. The
first is that oil is recognized to exhibit
substantially less quench severity than cold water
in a high pressure spray. The second is that there
is no quantitative criterion either of quench
severity or to the precise meaning of vigorous
agitation. Finally, what is the process definition
of term intense quenching as referred to by
Kern [2].
In a series of patents published from 1967 to
1971 [5-7], somewhat more quantification was
provided for the production of various machinery
parts. Pressurized tanks (accumulators) were
used to deliver very high volumes,
approximately 3000 gal/min, of quenchant to
selected surface areas of the part being press
quenched. Such agitation was designated as
extreme or drastic. The purpose that was
stated for performing such high-volume delivery
processes was to achieve maximum hardness

Another method of minimizing cracking and

distortion reported by Morio was to quench the
part using sufficiently high agitation rates to
eliminate film boiling on the surface which
would provide a more uniform quench. The
critical cooling rate for this process (drastic
quenching) was the cooling rate which is
necessary to eliminate film boiling. The agitation
rate/quench severity correlation used to calculate
the critical cooling rate was taken from the
traditional Grossmann Quench Severity data
shown in Table 1 [14]. According to Morio, the
practical limit for water quenching was 1.5-2.0,
unless high-pressure sprays were employed.
This approach is complicated by the absence of a
definition of mild, moderate, good, etc. for
agitation rate. Furthermore, it is impossible to
tell by observation of surface roll etc. since
agitation in quench tanks is notoriously nonuniform!

Table 1
Gross Quench Severity (in-1) for Various
Quench Media as a Function of Agitation
Agitation
None
Mild
Moderate
Good
Strong
Violent

Oil
0.25-0.30
0.30-0.35
0.35-0.40
0.40-0.50
0.50-0.80
0.8-1.1

Water
0.9-1.1
1.0-1.1
1.2-1.3
1.4-1.5
1.6-2.0
4.0

Brine
2.0
2.0-2.2

5.0

Mei has taken the approach reported by Morio

even further by stating that an agitation rate
sufficient to provide a Grossman Quench
Severity value of > 6.0 is required to provide an
intensive quenching process [13]. However, in

addition to the limitations of the use of

Grossman H-values, the approach reported by
Mei is based on trial and error experimentation.
B. What is Intensive Quenching
These historical references indicate that intensive
quenching is conducted with very high
(extreme or violent) agitation rates with a
Grossmann H-value of >6.0. Agitation is a focus
of these papers and unfortunately alloys and
cross-section
sizes
are
not
addressed
quantitatively with the exception of Meis and
Morios papers [13, 14]. While this information
is helpful to envision an intensive quenching
process, it is insufficient to properly design a
quenching process for optimal results for a
particular application. .
Perhaps the simplest and correct working
definition of intensive quenching is those
conditions that lead to maximum surface
compressive stresses. However, to properly
design a system, it is important to consider
together those conditions that affect the
formation of maximum surface compressive
stresses including: alloy, part shape, crosssection size, quenching cooling rate and final
machining/grinding. By Kobaskos definition of
intensive quenching, it is quite likely that,
depending on the materials, cross-section sizes
and actual cooling rates achieved at the hot metal
interface during quenching, many of those
processes described above may either NOT be
intensively quenched or they may not have
possessed maximum surface compressive
stresses.
C. Intensive Quenching System Design
Recently, a process simulation procedure has
been developed and patented that enables the
part designer to obtain higher performance from
a given material and while at the same time
providing lower part distortion [16]. It is the
"other side" of Figure 2- sufficiently high
cooling rate to achieve desired physical
properties and low distortion, the region of
maximum surface compressive stresses.
Intensive water quenching systems designed by
IntensiQuench(SM) employ very fast cooling
and high performance physical properties are no
longer as dependent on steel hardenability. The
design process integrates material selection; part
design and heat treat process selection. (A

discussion of intensive quenching and process

design is available in a paper titled Theory of
Intensive Quenching which is available at
(www.IntensiveQuench.com). An illustration of
a computer simulation of an intensive cooling
process is provided
In addition to computer simulation, it is
necessary to validate the proposed process
conditions using appropriate trials based on
accumulated knowledge and the simulated
results. The computer model provides the
parameters to insure a robust part processing
methodology: based on material properties
(stress-strain conditions); alloying element
effects; the mapping of part geometry; the
needed minimum cooling rate for proper
formation of the surface martensite shell; the
method of making the shell uniform, and the
parameters for the quenching equipment to
form that
shell repeatedly
and
reproducibly; minimization of distortion and
elimination of internal and external cracks; and
the proper window for interruption of the
intensive phase of the quench (when
compressive surface stresses are at their
maximum value and at their optimum depth).
When all these parameters are synchronized,
IntensiQuench(SM)
provides a
unique
microstructure of
"packaged"
or "packed"
martensite, with very high dislocation
densities, a "super-strengthened" layer of
compressive stress, and the low part distortion,
all from lower alloy steel.
Another driver for the adoption of intensive
water quenching is the elimination of oil
quenching and the various associated hazards.
Since IntensiQuench(SM) uses water and not oil,
it offers the manufacturer the flexibility to place
the heat treating operation in line with the
machining and grinding operations on the
production floor,
within
the
manufacturing/machining cell. No longer
must parts be batch carburized in long cycles and
oil quenched to provide surface compressive
stresses, and a properly toughened core. Plug
quenching
can
be
eliminated
since
IntensiQuench(SM) builds the "die" on the
outside of the part during the intensive part of
the quench cycle

by Figure 3. This figure shows the uniform

thermal gradients obtained with intensive
quenching.

CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, selected historical overviews of
various published intensive quenching processes
have been reviewed. With the exception of
Kobaskos ongoing work, there have been no
other comprehensive and quantitative works on
this process. In fact, when considering
Kobaskos definition of intensive quenching
those processes that yield maximum surface
compressive stresses that many of those earlier
processes may either have been not intensive or
they may not have yielded maximum surface
compressive stresses. Current, a computer
simulation process, IntensiQuench(SM), has
been developed to aid in the design of intensive
quench systems that yield optimum results. It is
likely that as intensive quenching becomes better
understood with the use of appropriately design
systems, that many oil quenching processes, such
as carburization, will be replaced.
REFERENCES
1.

G. Beck, Mem. Etud. Sci. Rev. Metall.,

1985, June, p. 269-282.
2. R.F. Kern, Heat Treating, 1986,
September, p. 19-23.
3. H. Kurz, USP 1,828,325, October
20,1931.
4. R.H. Hays, J.E. Sansom and K.D.
Gladden, USP 3,506,501, April 14,
1970.
5. B. Paddock, USP 3,517,676, June 30,
1970.
6. R.H. Hays, J.E. Sansom and K.D.
Gladden, USP 3,589,697, June 29,
1971.
7. J.E. Sansom, USP 3,515,601, June 2,
1970.
8. N.I. Kobasko, Metallovedenie and
Termicheskaya Obrabotka Metallov,
1964, No. 2, p. 53-54.
9. N.I. Kobasko, Chapter 10.4 - Intensive
Steel Quenching Methods, in Theory
and Technology of Quenching, Eds. B.
Liscic, H.M. Tensi and W. Luty, 1992,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany, p.
367-389.
10. B.L. Ferguson, N.I. Kobasko, M.A.
Aronov, and J. Powell, in 19th Heat
Treating
Society Conference Proceedings, Eds.
S. Midea and G. Pfaffmann, ASM
International, Materials Park, OH, 1999
p. 355-362.

11. N.I. Kobasko, Steel Quenching in

Liquid Media Under Pressure, 1980,
Naukova Dumka, Kiev, Ukraine.
12. V.A. Lisovoy, N.I. Kobasko, M.V.
Kindrachuk, and A.A. Khalatov, USSR
Patent 4,176,788, 1987.
13. Mei Daming, Intensive Quenching
method for Preventing Quench
Cracking, Proceedings of the 7th
International Congress of Heat
Treatment and Technology of Surface
Coating, 1990, Vol. 2, p. 62-71.
14. A. Morio, Water Hardening,
Kinzoku Zairyou, 1977,Vol. 17., No. 3,
p. 45-53.
15. R.B. Liss, C.G. Massieon and A.S.
McKloskey, The Development of Heat
Treat Stresses and Their Effect on
Fatique Strength of Hardened Steels,
SAE Technical Paper Series, Paper
Number 650517, 1965.
16. N.I. Kobasko, Quenching Apparatus
and Method for Hardening Steel Parts,
USP 6,364,974, April 2, 2002.