Surface Engineering

ISSN: 0267-0844 (Print) 1743-2944 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ysue20

Influence of laser hardening on mechanical

properties of a low alloy steel

S. K. Putatunda, M. Nambiar & N. Clark

To cite this article: S. K. Putatunda, M. Nambiar & N. Clark (1997) Influence of laser hardening
on mechanical properties of a low alloy steel, Surface Engineering, 13:5, 407-414, DOI: 10.1179/
sur.1997.13.5.407

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1179/sur.1997.13.5.407

Published online: 19 Jul 2013.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 34

View related articles

Citing articles: 5 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ysue20
'INFLUENCE OF LASER HARDENING
ON MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF A
lOW AllOY STEEL
s. K. Putatunda, M. Nambiar, and N. Clark
An investigation was carried out to examine the
influence of laser hardening on the mechanical prop-
erties of 300M steel. The mechanical properties
(including high cycle fatigue strength) of 300M steel
surfaces hardened by several conventional techniques
such as shot peening, carbonitriding, and induction
hardening have been compared with the mechanical
properties of CO2 laser hardened specimens. The effects
of such sUlface coatings as manganese phosphate and
colloidal graphite on the laser hardening were also
examined. The influence of all these hardening methods
on the nature and magnitude of the resulting residual
stresses was studied. The results of the present
investigation indicate that the induction hardening
produces the largest improvement in high cycle fatigue
strength. Laser hardened specimens with manganese
phosphate coating also showed significant improvement
in high cycle fatigue strength over untreated specimens.
In contrast, the high cycle fatigue strength of the
graphite coated laser treated specimens was lower than
that of untreated specimens. Test results also show
INTRODUCTION
In many structural applications, materials must have
high hardness at the surface1 while the interior must
remain soft or ductile. High surface hardness improves
wear and impact resistance,2,3 while the softer inner
core provides high fracture resistance. In addition,
surface hardening generally introduces residual com-
pressive stresses at the surface and can improve the
fatigue resistance of the material.
There are several conventional methods for surface
hardening: induction hardening, shot peening, and
carbonitriding. All these processes produce a thin
and hard surface layer while the interior of the
material remains soft and ductile. Induction harden-
ing is a process whereby steel is rapidly heated with
an induction coil to the austenitic temperature range
(800-900°C). Immediately after this, the specimens
are quenched in water to room temperature. During
induction hardening, the surface develops a hard
layer by phase transformation of austenite to marten-
site as a result of rapid cooling. During this
transformation of austenite to martensite, a change
in volume4 is produced (about 3% expansion). While
the martensite layer tries to expand because of the
increase in volume, the surrounding austenitic layer
restrains this expansion.5,6 As a result of this uneven
expansion and contraction, residual compressive
stresses are introduced at the surface. These compress-
ive stresses contribute to the increased surface
hardness and improved high cycle fatigue strength of
induction hardened materials.
Shot peening is a cold working process2 in which
the surface is bombarded with small spherical media.
Each shot striking the surface of the material acts
that laser hardening produced surface hardness compar-
able to that achieved by induction hardening. However,
the ductility of the laser hardened specimens (both
manganese phosphate and graphite coats) was signifi-
cantly lower than that of the induction hardened
specimens. The major problem appears to be the
formation of a diffusion bonded phosphate layer on the
interface of manganese phosphate coated specimens.
The lower fatigue strength and ductility of the laser
treated graphite coated specimens appear to be a result
of surface melting. Induction hardening introduced
significant amounts of compressive residual stresses
into the surface of these specimens.
The authors are in the Department of Materials
Science and Engineering, Wayne State University,
Detroit, MI 48202, USA. Manuscript received 21
January 1997; in final form 24 April 1997.
© 1997 The Institute of Materials.
like a tiny hammer, forming a small indentation or
dimple. This process produces residual compressive
stresses at the surface, while in the interior it produces
residual tensile stresses. Shot peening is known to
improve high cycle fatigue strength significantly when
the specimens are subjected to bending fatigue.
Another important surface hardening process is
carbonitriding. This process involves several steps.
First, material is vapour degreased to remove oil,
dirt, and scales. The material is then preheated to
400°C to ensure drying. After preheating, specimens
are immersed in a salt bath and maintained at 577°C
for 90 min to allow a diffusion layer of carbon and
nitrogen to form at the surface. After this'carbonitrid-
ing process, the specimens are subjected to intermedi-
ate quenching in a fused salt bath maintained at
400°C. The specimens are then water quenched.
Finally, the specimens are dipped in a water displacing
oil to remove all residual water. This leaves the
specimen with a light film of oil on the surface, which
preyents atmospheric oxidation, and a thin hardened
surface layer.
In recent years significant progress has been made
in the application of lasers to metal coating pro-
cesses,7-17 including surface hardening. Metals exhib-
iting heat induced phase transition behaviour are
particularly good candidates for laser surface treat-
ment. A laser beam can generate very intense energy
fluxes at the workpiece surface, resulting in rapid
heating of the surface layer while the bulk of the
material remains closer to ambient temperature.
Providing that sufficient mass is available in the
workpiece,lO thermal energy absorbed in the surface
layer can be removed quickly via thermal conduction,
Surface Engineering 1997 Vo1.U NO.5 407
408 Putatunda et al. Influence of laser hardening on mechanical properties of a low alloy steel

received condition were determined according to

~ 1-'3"----+1
1-- -- -~- --"~- -3 -- -- G~"-$m
!
ASTM standard E-8.

\. 46". .1 !
Surface hardening
After fabrication, each specimen was cleaned and
1 Schematic diagram of cylindrical tensile test specimen degreased in acetone. Following this, the specimens
showing dimensions in inches: 1 in = 25·4 mm were surface hardened by one of four methods.

Induction hardening
resulting in the formation of a thin martensitic layer.
Specimens were inserted in a specially prepared
Uneven expansion and contraction of the martensitic
induction coil and heated to the austenitising temper-
and austenitic phases during heating and cooling will
ature of 871°C, and immediately water quenched
induce residual compressive stress,!l resulting in
to room temperature. This was accomplished by a
enhanced wear and impact resistance, as well as
scanning method in which the specimens were
higher fatigue strength. Dimensional distortion can
progressively heated and quenched. The frequency of
be minimised by maintaining close correlation
induction hardening was 60 Hz. A specially prepared
between the input laser energy and specific surface
copper coil was used for this purpose.
contours by varying beam shape and incident
power.7,12 In addition, a laser beam can be mani-
Carbonitriding
pulated to reach normally inaccessible areas on
Specimens were preheated to a temperature of 400°C
the workpiece surface. Thus, selective hardening or
to ensure drying. After preheating, the specimens
softening can be achieved, which is difficult with
were immersed in a salt bath and maintained at
other techniques.
600°C for 2 h to allow a diffusion layer of carbon
One of the major problems associated with the use
and nitrogen to form on the surface. After this
of lasers in surface hardening has been the inability
carbonitriding process, the specimens were quenched
to produce uniform hardness on the surface of a
in a fused salt bath maintained at a temperature of
body with varying cross-sections or contours.7-12 The
400°C before being air cooled to room temperature.
primary objective of the present investigation was to
This process poroduced a very thin but sufficiently
examine the feasibility of hardening low alloy 300M
hard surface layer.
steel bars with different cross-sections using laser
energy. The secondary objective was to compare the
Shot peening
mechanical properties and case depth of laser hard-
Specimens were mounted on a rotating platform and
ened 300M steel with steel hardened by conventional
bombarded with 0·023 in (0·58 mm) diameter steel
processes such as induction hardening, carbonitriding,
balls. The steel balls were shot from air nozzles with
and shot peening. The effect of absorbent coatings
a backing pressure of 70 lb in -2 (0·48 MPa). The
on the efficiency of laser hardening of 300M steel
nozzles were kept approximately 25 cm away from
has also been examined. The optimum parameters
the specimens and air flow was maintained at
resulting in uniform laser hardening have been
1000 ft3 min -1 (28·3 m3 min -1).
documented through detailed experimental analysis.
These parameters include beam size, power density,
Laser hardening
rotational and translational speed of the workpiece,
This was carried out by a continuous wave CO2
and the workpiece surface condition.
laser. The cylindrical test specimens were mounted in
a holder designed to rotate about their cylindrical
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE axis while translating them linearly through a station-
Material ary laser beam. Two types of coatings were used.
The material used in the present investigation is a Initial trials showed that these specimens could not
low alloy 300M steel. This material was selected for be sufficiently surface hardened by laser without
the following reasons: 300M steel is used in many some coating owing to lack of absorptivity of the
critical structural applications in aircraft and auto- laser~ Therefore, in order to increase absorption of
mobiles, where it is subjected to cyclic loading or laser energy, the surfaces of these specimens were
fatigue; and it has intrinsic hardenability. The chemi- coated. One set of specimens was coated with
cal composition of 300M steel (Fe-0·41C-l·68Si- manganese phosphate before laser treatment; the
0·78 Mn-0·002 P-0·002 S-0·81 Cr-0·40 Mo-l·83Ni- other batch was coated with colloidal graphite.
0·05AI-0·06Ti-0·063V) is very similar to that of A power of 3·9 kW was delivered to the coated
AISI4340 steel, except for its relatively high silicon specimen surface in the form of a circular laser spot
content, which makes it more resistant to softening with a diameter of 9·0 mm, producing an intensity of
during tempering. This increased temper resistance, 6·2 k W cm - 2• The bulk of the end of the specimen
coupled with a moderate carbon content, makes
300M steel a particularly hardenable steel when
subjected to rapid heating and cooling. Table 1 Sequence of events in laser hardening treatment
The 300M steel was obtained in the cold rolled Sequence, s Position, em Diameter, em Speed, em s -1
and annealed condition. Cylindrical tensile specimens
were prepared according to ASTM standard E-8. A 0'0-2·0 0·0 1·27 2 s dwell
schematic diagram of the test specimens used in this 2·0-9·5 0'0-3'0 1·27 0·4
investigation is shown in Fig. 1. The diameter of the 9·5-12·5 3·0-6·0 0·76-1·27 1·0
12·5-15·5 6'0-7·5 0·76-1·14 0·5
specimen was o·30 in, and the gauge length was 2 in. 15·5-21·75 7·5-10'0 1·14-1·27 0·4
The mechanical properties of the material in as

Surface Engineering 1997 Vol. 13 NO.5

 Putatunda et ai. Influence of laser hardening on mechanical properties of a low alloy steel 409

in a servohydraulic MTS test machine. All tests were

carried out at room temperature in ambient atmos-
phere. Five specimens were tested from each surface
treated condition. The average values are given
in Table 3.

2 Experimental setup for laser hardening treatment
was heated with the laser by maintaining a 2 s dwell
time before linear translation was initiated. While the
rotational speed was held constant at 15·7 rev s -1,
the linear motion was varied according to the
geometry of the specimen, with translational speed
inversely proportional to diameter. After several trials
it was established that this rotational and trans-
lational speed regime produced maximum and uni-
form hardness along the longitudinal section of the
specimen. This method produced a uniform thermal
cycle along the test specimen because there was no
track overlap. It was observed earlier during the trial
period that track overlap produces material between
the tracks that does not harden to the same extent,
or often softens. Therefore, the above procedure
(Table 1) was necessary to surface harden the material
uniformly by laser. The experimental setup is shown
in Fig. 2.
Fatigue testing
The high cycle fatigue testing of all specimens was
carried out according to ASTM standard E-408. The
specimens were loaded in an MTS testing machine
grip and held there under tension. All tests were
carried out at room temperature and in ambient
atmosphere. The tests were carried out in load control
mode using a load ratio of 0·1 in tension-tension
mode. A constant cyclic frequency of 10Hz at
constant amplitude loading was used. Five or six
identical test specimens were tested at each stress
range. Finally, the stress range and the number of
cycles to failure were plotted on a semi-log scale. The
high cycle fatigue strength of each series of specimens
was determined at the 10 million cycle range.
Residual stress management
The nature and extent of residual stress produced in
each series of specimens as a result of the various
hardening techniques were determined by X-ra y
analysis. The specimens were cross-sectioned and the
X-ray analysis was carried out in a Rigaku X-ray
machine to determine the residual stress profile.
Fractography
The fracture surfaces of the fatigue specimens were
analysed using a Hitachi scanning electron micro-
scope. The fracture type and crack growth mechanism
were identified using fractographic techniques.

Hardness measurement RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

All microhardness measurements were done after
polishing of the specimen surfaces. A calibrated
Buehler microhardness tester was used for these
measurements. The values obtained were eventually
used for case depth analysis. A Rockwell hardness
tester (model Macromet -1) was used for surface
hardness measurement. Eight to ten readings were
taken to achieve better accuracy. Hardness was also
measured after cross-sectioning of the specimens in
the transverse direction. The case depth analysis
results are given in Table 2.
Tensile testing
After fabrication and surface hardening, specimens
were tested for yield and ultimate tensile strength,
and per cent elongation. These tests were carried out
Microhardness profile
Specimens from each treatment method were cross-
sectioned in the transverse direction to obtain
microhardness measurements. The degree and depth
of hardness produced by each treatment method can
be seen in Fig. 3. The carbonitriding method produced
a uniform hardened zone extending less than 0·25 mm
into the material. The induction hardening and laser
treatment methods increased hardness by over 100%,
with the hardened zone extending approximately
1·0 mm into the material. The hardness profiles
clearly show that laser hardening with graphite or
manganese phosphate coating and induction harden-
ing produced maximum hardness, while the shot
Table 3 Results of tensile testing of 300M steel specimens

Table 2 Results of case depth analysis Ultimate

Yield tensile
Surface Interior strength, strength, Elongation,
Case depth, hardness, hardness, Material condition MPa MPa %
Material condition mm HRC HRC
As received 808 1018 16-4
Induction hardened 1·77 60 33 Induction hardened 1270 1641 9·5
Carbonitrided 0·21 45 33 Carbonitrided 805 1016 16·5
Shot peened 0·33 37 32 Shot peened 834 1041 22-4
Laser hardened (graphite 1·285 57 32 Laser hardened (graphite 1085 1516 2·2
coated) coated)
Laser hardened (manganese 0·95 61 32 Laser hardened (manganese 960 1413 3·8
phosphate coated) phosphate coated)

Surface Engineering 1997 Vol. 13 NO.5

410 Putatunda et al. Influence of laser hardening on mechanical properties of a low alloy steel

800-,-------------------------,
(b)

700

600

>
=-
III

•..
..
III

'E=
'DO

...
II

=
~
.....
.. . ..
300
~
I

Distance (mm)
800
(d)

.•••
... y.
I 700 .....
..
...
...
. . .
...
. 600
~
,
I

.... >e
III '00
•..
VI

'E=

.,
II

= 400

-,.
300
0

Distance (mm)

700

,.
600 ~\
~. .f
.. .'
.500
III

•..
III

-e=
=
II

..
..... . ..
JOO-t-------r------,r-----""'T-"-----t
. ....
o

Distance (mm) --------~

a shot peened; b carbonitrided; c induction hardened; d laser hardened and manganese phosphate coated; e laser hardened and
graphite coated
3 Microhardness profiles of 300M steel after different surface hardening treatments

peening process resulted in minimum case depth and
surface hardness. The specimen centres remained soft
or unreacted. While both the induction and laser
treatment methods provided superior surface harden-
ing, it appears that induction hardening produces
maximum case depth. The case depth analyses are
given in Table 2.
Tensile test results
Tensile tests were conducted on as received specimens
and on specimens subjected to each surface treatment
method. The tensile test results for all surface
hardened specimens are given in Table 3. The induc-
tion hardened specimens had higher strength than
laser hardened specimens, while the carbonitrided

Surface Engineering 1997 Vol. 13 No.5

 Putatunda et ai. Influence of laser hardening on mechanical properties of a low alloy steel 411

150 Table 4 Residual stressing and endurance limit of 300M

steel

Endurance
125 limit, Maximum residual
Material condition MPa stress, MPa

As received 507*
Induction hardened 965 414 (compressive)
Carbonitrided 652 558 (compressive)
Shot peened 758 607 (compressive)
Laser hardened (manganese 723 276 (compressive)
75 phosphate coated)
Laser hardened (graphite 496 70 (tensile)
coated)

50 . * From published data.

1000 100000 10000000
Cycles to failure

4 High cycle fatigue life diagram for carbonitrided 300M these results are superior to those from other
steel hardening processes such as carbonitriding and shot
peening. However, induction hardened specimens
have higher ultimate tensile strength and ductility.
and shot peened specimens had lower strength. The No significant distortion was observed in the speci-
surface hardness and ductility of the laser hardened mens.
specimens were lower compared to the induction
hardened specimens. Closer examination of the Fatigue test results
microstructures revealed surface melting in the graph- The high cycle fatigue strengths of all these series of
ite coated specimens, whereas with manganese phos- specimens are given in Table 4 and S- N curves are
phate coating a diffusion bonded phosphate layer shown in Figs.4 and 5. It is evident from these
was observed at the surface. This caused a reduction figures that the maximum improvement in high cycle
in ductility in these specimens because of grain fatigue strength is obtained by induction hardening
boundary embrittlement. Examination of these speci- (approximately 900/0). Conventional carbonitriding
mens by EDS demonstrated the presence of phosphate and shot peening processes also improved high cycle
in the grain boundary region. fatigue strength. Carburising and shot peening
Table 3 shows that the yield and ultimate tensile increased the high cycle fatigue strength by about 30
strengths of the two types of laser hardened specimen and 500/0,respectively, over the as received specimens.
(manganese phosphate coated and graphite coated) The manganese phosphate coated specimens had
are comparable to each other. Both coating processes about 400/0 higher high cycle fatigue strength than
significantly improve yield and tensile strength, and as received specimens, while the graphite coated

140 (a) I
ill
!

120'-
'~en II I

enen
~ 100 I
I
I
80

1000
II I I
100000
i
10000000
II III
10000000
Cycles to failure

180 (c:1-I-ffifiWll . III i I I

i II11 200 (d)i I I II! UJffil
III
O
~ 16-,-r-rmrtr
···-iitt!ljn~+1-IJHr-JI-·ll-iIH-JL---iH+III--r
1 i,,1 I ITIT - 1I1 Tn ~ 160 i~
~-I
NJ I
,I' I

,
II
II
1
: II~III
III,H,~i+J
1111

l",lmt, i

I, I-L~II -rrixi
~140
Q) -n III I
CO" I

I
I
e 120 1-+
en 1-[ I I i

I
I Ill!
Iii I!
,'I
I1j I·
I i
I

~
en 120
f--: !
I
I
III
,
I"
I -"-El
I en II' \..
\.
I II
I
11,1
'I
I! i II
l-i-i-l- L,
1,

100
ii:Ii :I i III III
~I~

I
!
I Ii
I 80'---
I
i-LJ -~
II I II II
I

II'
! I
I 111111I1
IIU-WJ~
i; \ i I1I I

100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 10000000
Cycles to failure Cycles to failure
a shot peened; b induction hardened; c laser hardened and manganese phosphate coated; d laser hardened and graphite coated
5 High cycle fatigue life diagrams for 300M steel: 1 ksi = 6·895 MPa

Surface Engineering 1997 Vol. 13 No.5

412 Putatunda et ai. Influence of laser hardening on mechanical properties of a low alloy steel

30

.• .• .'. .• . . . :. . . . .
.
~.. . . .. :.....:.....
.
-:. . . . .:. . . . . .: . . . . .:. . . . .
..
.
... ..
..'
.
'" .
.. .. .
-eo .
: .
~ : :. .

c graphite coated V Mn phosphate coated

c shot peened .•. carburised o induction hardened

30

..
................................................... . _ .....
-eo

~OO 2 ~ 6 B W ~ " ~ ~ m
DEPTH (x1.Q-3 inJ

6 Residual stress distributions in 300M steel after various

surface hardening treatments: 1 ksi = 6·895 MPa, 1 in =
25·4 mm

specimens had lower fatigue strength then as received

specimens. Interestingly, shot peening increased the
high cycle fatigue strength compared to as received
specimens in tension-tension loading by about 50o~.

Residual stress distribution results

The residual stress measured on the surface of the
specimens is shown in Fig. 6. The extent and nature
of the residual stresses are given in Table 4. It is a as received; b carbonitrided; c shot peened
evident that shot peening, carbonitriding, and induc- 7 Fractographs of 300M steel in various conditions
tion hardening introduced significant residual com-
pressive stresses at the surface. The manganese
phosphate coated specimen had some compressive typical transgranular quasi cleavage. Figure 7c shows
residual stresses at the surface, but to a much lesser a typical fractograph of a shot peened specimen; once
extent than in other specimens. The graphite coated again, the crack path appears to be intergranular.
specimens, on the other hand, had positive or tensile A fractograph of an induction hardened specimen
residual stresses at the surface. Residual stress caused is shown in Fig. 8a: formation of massive carbides
the variation in high cycle fatigue strength as can be seen here. Although the laser hardened and
exemplified by the graphite coated specimens. induction hardened specimens showed very similar
surface hardening, their fatigue strengths were very
Fractographic results different. The reason for this can be traced to the
The fracture surfaces of the fatigued specimens were fracture surfaces of these materials.
analysed using a Hitachi 8-2400 scanning elec- A fractograph of a manganese phosphate coated
tron microscope. The fractographs are shown in laser hardened specimen is shown in Fig.8b. The
Figs. 7-9. formation of the diffusion bonded layer can be clearly
Figure 7a shows a fractograph of an as received seen on the surface. The large particles visible on the
specimen with clear intergranular fracture. Figure 7b fracture surface were analysed by ED X, and were
shows a fracto graph of a carbonitrided specimen with determined to be Fe- Mn phosphide particles. These

Surface Engineering 1997 Vol. 13 NO.5

 Putatunda et at.
Diffusion bonded layers
b
a induction hardened; b laser hardened and manganese
phosphate coated
8 Fractographs of 300M steel in various conditions
phosphide particles have diffused into the grain
boundaries, and significant grain embrittlement
results in lower fatigue strength. It therefore appears
that if the diffusion bonded layer could be removed
after laser hardening, significant improvement in high
cycle fatigue strength would be possible.
Two fracto graphs of laser hardened specimens with
graphite coating are shown in Fig. 9, the lower of
which clearly demonstrates the presence of a molten
zone near the surface. It appears that this melting,
occurring very close to the surface, has contributed
to the low fatigue resistance as a result of the
dendritic structure formation. If melting could be
prevented, significant improvement in high cycle
fatigue strength would be possible. The formation of
a dendritic structure is probably the reason for tensile
residual stress at the surface of these specimens.
Melting in the surface region occurred owing to
increased absorption of laser energy. If this absorption
could be reduced, surface melting could be prevented,
and then possibly the fatigue strength would increase.
These problems need to be resolved: further investi-
gation must be directed towards reducing surface
melting and preventing tensile stress development. It
appears that the formation of massive carbides is less
harmful than surface melting or embrittlement.
Microstructural analysis
The microstructures of the materials after different
surface hardening treatments are shown in Fig. 10.
These cross-sections show both the hardened surface
layer and the core microstructure. Analysis of these
microstructures reveals several interesting features.
The microstructures of both types of laser hardened
specimen (graphite coated and manganese phosphate
coated) exhibit very fine needlelike martensite in the
ferrite + pearlite matrix. The induction hardened
specimens, on the other hand, show the presence
of coarse martensitic grains. During laser hardening
the cooling rate is extremely rapid (105 K S-1)
Influence of laser hardening on mechanical properties of a low alloy steel 413
Molten area at surface
9 Fractographs of graphite coated laser hardened 300M
steel
compared to that obtained in induction hardening
(102 K S -1). This rapid cooling produces the ex-
tremely fine martensitic needles observed in the laser
processed specimens. As expected, the shot peened
specimens, not having experienced the elevated tem-
peratures needed to form martensite, show no sign of
martensite in the matrix.
CONCLUSIONS
1. Laser hardening appears to be a viable surface
hardening method. Laser surface hardness is compar-
able to that produced by induction hardening.
2. Induction hardening improves the high cycle
fatigue strength of 300M steel by approximately 90%,
whereas laser hardening after manganese phosphate
coating improves fatigue strength by about 40%.
Two factors contribute to this: the lower compressive
residual stress and the diffusion bonded phosphate
layer at the surface.
3. Graphite coated specimens showed tensile
residual stresses at the surface, causing a reduction
in fatigue strength compared to as received specimens.
4. Carbonitriding and shot peening improved
fatigue strength by approximately 30 and 500/0,
respectively.
. 5. Graphite coated specimens showed melting in
the surface region owing to increased absorption of
laser energy.
Surface Engineering 1997 Vol. 13 NO.5
414 Putatunda et ai. Influence of laser hardening on mechanical properties of a low alloy steel

a b

c d

e f
a as received; b shot peened (showing case microstructure); c carbonitrided (showing case depth); d induction hardened (showing
case depth); e laser hardened and manganese phosphate coated (showing case/core separation); f laser hardened and graphite coated
(showing case/core separation)
10 Micrographs showing microstructure of 300M steel in various conditions

REFERENCES 8. and J. I. NURMINEN: 'A

G. E. GROTKE, G. J. BRUCK, J. E. SMITH,
parametric study of surface transformation hardening with
1. P. A. THORNTON and v. J. COLLOMSELO: 'Fundamentals high-powered lasers', Research and Development Report
of engineering materials', 126-128; 1985, New Jersey, NJ, AD A140160; 1984, Westinghouse Research and Development
Prentice Hall. Center.
2. R. W. HERTZBERG: 'Deformation and fracture mechanics of 9. o. A. SANDERS: 'ASM metals handbook', Vol. 4,282-292; 1976,
engineering materials', 435-438; 1987, New York, NY, Materials Park, OH, ASM International.
Wiley. 10. R. J. SAUNDERS: Metall. Prog., 1984, July, 45-51.
3. R. W. LANDGRAF and R. H. RICHMAN: 'Fatigue behaviour of 11. T. FAKUDA, M. KIKUCHI, and s. KIGUCHI: Ind. Heat., 1985,
carburised steels', ASTM Special Technical Publication 569, March, 41-44.
130-142; 1973, Philadelphia, PA, ASTM. 12. M. LANDER et al.: Proc. 14th Int. Conf. on the Application of
4. D. VUKOVICH and R. PIERMAN: 'Laboratory evaluation of new Lasers and Electro-Optics, San Diego, CA, 1995, Laser
alloy gear steels', SAE paper 770416; 1977, Warrendale, PA, Institute of America, 122-135.
Society of Automotive Engineers. 13. K. WANG, J. LIN, and D. HAN: Surf Eng., 1996, 12, 235-238.
5. D. E. DIESBURG: 'Residual stress measurement by X-ray 14. H. BHAT et al.: Proc. 10th Int. Thermal Spraying Conf., Essen,
diffraction', SAE paper 7849; 1971, Warrendale, PA, Society of Germany, May 1983.
Automotive Engineers. 15. L. SHANG: Chin. J. Lasers, 1990, 17, 491-493.
6. G. PARRISH: 'Heat treatment of metals', in 'ASM metals 16. s. c. TJONG, W. B. LIN, J. S. KU, and M. J. HO: Surf Eng., 1996,
handbook', Vol. 3, 73-79; 1976, Materials Park, OH, ASM 12,246-250.
International. 17. T. CHONDE, A. GHOSE, and J. MAZUMDAR: Surf Eng., 1987,
7. J. MAZUMDAR: J. Met., 1983, 5, 18-26. 3,53-58.

Surface Engineering 1997 Vol. 13 NO.5