A. Mehrabi et al.
: Improvement of AISI 4340 steel properties by intermediate quenching
Afshin Mehrabia , Hassan Sharifia , Mohsen Asadi Asadabadb , Reza Amini Najafabadic , Ali Rajaeed
a Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Shahrekord University, Shahrekord, Iran.
b NuclearScience and Technology Research Institute, Tehran, Iran.
c Department of Metallurgy and Materials Engineering, Golpayegan University of Technology, Golpayegan, Iran.
d Department of Materials and Polymer Engineering, Hakim Sabzevari University, Sabzevar, Iran.
Improvement of AISI 4340 steel properties
by intermediate quenching – microstructure,
mechanical properties, and fractography
AISI 4340 is one of the most widely used steels in high-risk
industries such as military, nuclear and aerospace. The
strength of this steel is capable of increasing to 1 825 MPa
with quench and temper heat treatment, but it results in
low toughness, low impact properties and brittle-fracture
especially at low temperatures. In this study, the intermedi-
ate quenching treatment was used to induce ferritic–mar-
tensitic dual-phase (*50/50 ferrite/martensite) microstruc-
ture that led to an impact energy of 93.6 kJ m–2, which was
241 % higher than that of quench and temper treatment.
Moreover, mechanical tests revealed tensile strength and
hardness of 911.5 MPa and 43 HRC, respectively. Also,
fractographic analysis confirmed the occurrence of the de-
sirable ductile fracture mechanism.
Keywords: AISI 4340 steel; Ferrite–martensite dual phase;
Intermediate quenching treatment (IQ); Mechanical proper-
ties; Ductile fracture
1. Introduction
AISI 4340 steel is widely used in critical industries such as
military, defense, nuclear and aerospace, due to having a
combination of optimal properties such as great strength,
good processability, high hardness, and ideal welding prop-
erties. Because of its higher nickel content than the other
medium carbon low alloy steels, it offers higher strength,
toughness and hardness [1]. Reports indicate that high-
strength steels in industrial applications suffer from unpre-
dicted brittle fractures. This results in the occurrence of un-
expected shutdowns and high damage costs on the involved
components. The induction of dual-phase microstructure by
different heat treatments is one of the effective solutions
which has been proposed by recent studies [2 – 5].
Lai et al. were the pioneering researchers who evaluated
the effect of quench and temper (Q&T) treatment on the
properties of AISI 4340 steel. Afterward, Tomita and Oka-
bayashi obtained the highest strength for this steel. They
showed that Q&T heat treatment increased the strength of
the steel to that of ultra-high-strength steels (UHSS) [6, 7].
Materkowski and Krauss showed that the Q&T heat treat-
ment created tempered martensite microstructure in this
steel [8]. Furthermore, Davis concluded that after the hard-
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 111 (2020) 9
ening of AISI 4340, low toughness, weak impact properties,
and brittle fracture at low temperatures might occur [9]. Ad-
ditionally, Chandler described that to simultaneously im-
prove the toughness and strength of AISI 4340 steel, at least
one of the heat treatments of homogenization, normalizing,
quenching and tempering, intercritical annealing, austem-
pering and martempering were required [10]. Later, it was
claimed that for improving the strength and toughness prop-
erties of AISI 4340 steel at the same time, multiple heat
treatments or a combination of heat treatment and con-
trolled hot rolling were required [11 – 13]. Moreover,
Huang et al. [14] used inter-critical quenching to form aus-
tenite for TRIP steel. However, rolling process difficulties
and its costs led to the fact that this process was not exten-
sively applicable in industry. In another study, it was re-
ported that a significant change in the mechanical proper-
ties of this steel was attained by intermediate quenching
(IQ) heat treatment [15].
It was reported that the impact and tensile properties of
this steel were improved by inducing the dual-phase micro-
structure. The ferritic–martensitic microstructure formed in
dual-phase steels by heat treatment or controlled hot-rolling
process provided much more favorable mechanical proper-
ties than the ferritic–pearlitic equilibrium or tempered mar-
tensitic microstructures [15, 16]. Among these, Saeidi and
Ekrami have done the most extensive research on dual-
phase microstructure of AISI 4340 steel. They attempted
to optimize parameters for dual-phase microstructure by
employing different heat treatments such as austempering,
martempering, and intercritical annealing. These parame-
ters comprised the distribution, volume fraction, and mor-
phology of ferrite and martensite phases [16 – 18].
Step quenching (SQ) treatment was the first process to be
investigated for the formation of the dual-phase microstruc-
ture in AISI 4340 steel. It was reported that due to the pre-
sence of medium carbon content (C& 0.4 wt.%), this steel
had a narrow dual-phase region in the iron-carbon equilibri-
um diagram. As a result, controlling the temperature during
intercritical annealing was crucial [19, 20]. By surveying
the earlier investigations on dual-phase steel, it was shown
that applying IQ treatment on high strength low alloy
(HSLA) steels resulted in a dual-phase microstructure that
provided more promising mechanical properties than the
other dual-phase-forming treatments. Additionally, they em-
771
A. Mehrabi et al.: Improvement of AISI 4340 steel properties by intermediate quenching

phasized that IQ heat treatment was one of the best methods
for the formation of dual-phase microstructure. The simpli-
city of thermal cycles and lack of the need for molten salt
baths, which were expensive and caused environmental ha-
zards, made it more applicable in future applications [21].
To date, IQ treatment has not been employed to create
the dual-phase microstructure for AISI 4340 steel. The aim
of this study is to investigate the effect of inducing dual-
phase microstructure on mechanical properties (tensile
strength, hardness, elongation and especially impact en-
ergy) of AISI 4340 steel via two different intermediate
quenching treatments. Furthermore, the results of this in-
vestigation were compared with conventional Q&T and
tempered IQ treatments. Finally, the optimum conditions
for achieving the highest impact energy are revealed.
2. Experimental procedure
ond and third treatments were IQ treatments, which were
applied for the formation of ferritic–martensitic microstruc-
tures. The difference between the two treatments was se-
lected as the intercritical annealing temperature. Equations
(1) and (2) were used to determine the critical temperatures
of A1 and A3 lines, which are lower and upper transforma-
tion temperatures, respectively, based on the contents of C,
Mn, Si, Ni, Mo, Cr, As, W and V (wt.%) [23].
A1 ¼ 723  10:7Mn  16:9Ni þ 29:1Si þ 16:9Cr
þ290As þ 6:38W ð1Þ
pffiffiffi
A3 ¼ 910  203 C  15:2Ni þ 44:7Si þ 104V
þ31:5Mo þ 13:1W ð2Þ
Using the values in Table 1, A1 and A3 critical temperatures
were calculated as 711.1 and 781.5 8C, respectively.

2.1. Materials 2.3. Microstructural examination

Heat treatment samples were prepared by cutting AISI 4340
steel rolled sheet with 4 mm thickness. The chemical com-
position of the steel sheet was determined by quantometer
analysis and is given in Table 1 according to a previous
study [22].
2.2. Heat treatment
The primary samples were subjected to normalizing treat-
ment to obtain Widmanstätten ferrite and fine microstruc-
ture. The samples were heated in a furnace at 900 8C for
1 h and were kept to cool down to reach room temperature.
To compare the microstructural and mechanical properties,
five different treatments were designed with the conditions
presented in Table 2. The aim was to induce five different
microstructures of tempered martensitic, dual-phase micro-
structures with different volume fractions of ferrite and
martensite, and tempered dual-phase microstructures. The
first treatment was a conventional Q&T treatment. The sec-
To reveal the microstructures of the heat-treated and nor-
malized samples via optical microscopy, the ground and
polished surfaces of the samples were immersed in Nital
etch solution (96 ml ethanol and 4 ml nitric acid) for 12 s
at room temperature.
Image-J Software was employed to analyze the metallo-
graphic images, determine the size of ferrite and martensite
phases, and calculate the volume fraction of each phase.
The procedure was repeated on five different spots of each
specimen.
To confirm the identification of the ferrite and martensite
phases, microhardness testing was carried out using the
Vickers method (HV). The indentation force was 100 g for
15 s and it was replicated at five different points.
2.4. Determination of mechanical properties
The surfaces of the samples with different microstructures
were ground by 1000-Grit sandpaper and the hardness of

Table 1. Chemical composition of the AISI 4340 steel used in this study.

Alloy elements C Mn Cr Ni Si Mo S P Fe

wt.% 0.38 0.68 0.98 1.805 0.32 0.31 0.018 0.011 Balance

Table 2. Summary of the heat treatment conditions.

Heat treatment First cycle Second cycle Third cycle

Q&T 900 8C for 60 min, – 210 8C for 60 min,

then quenched in oil
IQ1 900 8C for 60 min,
then quenched in oil
IQ2 900 8C for 60 min,
then quenched in oil
IQ1&T 900 8C for 60 min,
then quenched in oil
IQ2&T 900 8C for 60 min,
then quenched in oil
720 8C for 20 min,
then quenched in oil
760 8C for 20 min,
then quenched in oil
720 8C for 20 min,
then quenched in oil
760 8C for 20 min,
then quenched in oil
then cooled in air
–
–
210 8C for 60 min,
then cooled in air
210 8C for 60 min,
then cooled in air

772 Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 111 (2020) 9

A. Mehrabi et al.: Improvement of AISI 4340 steel properties by intermediate quenching
the samples was measured according to the Rockwell C
method (HRC). To increase the accuracy of the measure-
ments, the hardness tests were performed on five spots and
the average values were reported.
To study the tensile properties of the specimens, tensile
testing was carried out in accordance with the ASTM E8M
standard; the test was performed using a GUNT Hamburg
tensile machine (model WP 310, Germany) at room tem-
perature at a speed of 20 mm min–1.
Moreover, impact test samples were prepared according
to ASTM E23 standard and tested on a Santam impact tester
(model 300AE, Iran) at room temperature using pendulum
energy of 300 J.
2.5. Fractography
Fracture surfaces of the tensile test samples were examined
and analyzed using Zeiss scanning electron microscope
(SEM) (model EVO 18, Germany).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Microstructural analysis
Figure 1a shows the ferritic–pearlitic microstructure of the
normalized (N) sample. The bright phase is the eutectoid
ferrite while the dark phase is pearlite. As is evident, the
normalizing treatment resulted in a microstructure consist-
ing of a mixture of pearlite and ferrite phases. By observing
the image, it can be seen that there is no pearlite band
spread in the rolling direction of the sample; on the con-
trary, it was located along the Widmanstätten ferrite [10].
Figure 1b is a micrograph of the Q&T with a martensitic
structure. Coarse tempered lathy martensite and austenite
matrix are visible as dark and bright phases, respectively.
During the first cycle of Q&T treatment, the microstruc-
ture consisted of coarse martensite plates. During the sec-
ond cycle (at 210 8C), the plates were broadened, disloca-
tion density lowered and the carbon content of martensite
declined. Earlier studies reported that this phenomenon led
to higher ductility and transformation of retained austenite
to ferrite and cementite [16].
Figure 1c displays the micrograph of sample IQ1. The re-
sulting microstructure consists of ferrite and martensite
phases. Ferrite grains are the bright phase and martensite
plates are the dark phase. As can be seen, the martensite is
composed of a mixture of lathy and island-like morphologies
formed at the ferritic grain boundaries and between the fer-
rite grains. At this point, microhardness testing was em-
ployed to confirm the identification of the ferrite and marten-
site phases. The mean microhardness of the martensite and
ferrite was calculated as 590 and 220 HV for IQ1, respec-
tively. The values were then compared to the microstructural
observations and confirm the results. Due to the fact that IQ1
was subjected to intercritical annealing at 720 8C, this tem-
perature is considered as the low critical temperature. Since
it is close to the critical temperature of A1, IQ1 experienced
a shorter path in the intercritical region during cooling. Con-
sequently, the formed lathy morphology underwent low epi-
taxial growth. Also, most of the ferrite grains maintained
their Widmanstätten or wedge-shaped morphology. Speich
et al. described that during IQ treatment the distribution of
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 111 (2020) 9
austenite phase (which is transformed to martensite later)
was affected by ferrite growth [24].
Figure 1d shows a micrograph of IQ2. The microstruc-
ture also consists of a mixture of ferrite and martensitic
phases, and martensite in this microstructure is composed
of a mixture of lathy, island-like and plate-like morpholo-
gies in the ferrite grain boundaries and between the ferrite
grains. As shown in Fig. 1d, most of the grains have polygo-
nal morphology. This can be explained by the fact that IQ2
underwent a higher intercritical temperature with respect
to IQ1 and experienced a longer path compared to IQ1 dur-
ing cooling. As a result, needle-like ferrite grains, which
were created by IQ2 treatment, experienced more epitaxial
growth. However, the extent of epitaxial growth is low en-
ough in a way that it does not result in the growth of ferrite
grains. Additionally, as shown in Table 3, the average dia-
meter of ferrite grains in IQ1 is larger than that of IQ2.
Furthermore, in some regions of the IQ2 microstructure,
the epitaxial growth of ferrite grains near two ferrite
wedges caused the formation of large polygonal ferrite
grains. Shi et al. demonstrated the occurrence of this growth
in HSLA dual-phase steels and described its effect on the
mechanical properties [3, 25].
During the first cycle of IQ treatment, the specimen was
quenched in oil from the austenite region to form martensite
islands in the primary austenite grains. During the second
cycle, the specimen was heated to a certain temperature to
apply intercritical annealing. By heating the unstable mar-
tensitic structure to the intercritical region, the martensite
volume fraction reduced and the retained austenite was
transformed to fine cementite, other carbides and/or ferrite.
The formed ferrites acted as the nuclei for ferrite formation
in IQ. During intercritical annealing, ferrite nucleation in-
creased and finer ferrites with better dispersion resulted
due to the development of high-energy regions (regions
with high dislocation density caused by martensitic trans-
formation) and the presence of the martensite island bound-
aries. By analyzing both IQ1 and IQ2, it was found that the
martensite phase was continuous in both of the microstruc-
tures. However, by increasing the martensite volume frac-
tion in IQ2, the morphology of martensite was more similar
to island-like martensite. The major difference between the
two microstructures was the ferrite and martensite volume
fractions, ferrite grain size and the morphologies of the
phases [1, 26].
By comparing Fig. 1b, c, and d, it is evident that coarse
lathy martensite was present in Q&T; while there was no
evidence of martensitic plate in IQ1 and IQ2, which was
due to the fine and compact lathy martensite. Moreover, be-
cause the ferrite resulting from IQ1 treatment was finer, it
had lower volume fraction compared to that in the IQ2
treatment. On the other hand, a high volume fraction of aus-
tenite with larger grain size formed during the IQ treatment
caused the formation of large martensite islands with more
continuity in IQ2.
Figure 1e and f shows micrographs of tempered IQ1 and
IQ2 treatments, respectively. Ferrite presents with bright
shading, while martensite and carbides with dark shades,
respectively. It can be seen that during the tempering treat-
ment iron and other carbides formed at the grain boundaries
of martensite and ferrite. Also, because of the reduction of
martensite volume fraction, the morphology of martensite
islands changed and they became finer.
773
A. Mehrabi et al.: Improvement of AISI 4340 steel properties by intermediate quenching

Fig. 1. Optical micrographs of: (a) normalized sample, (b) conventional quench and temper treatment, (c) first intermediate quenching, (d) second
intermediate quenching, (e) first intermediate quenching followed by tempering, and (f) second intermediate quenching followed by tempering.

774 Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 111 (2020) 9

A. Mehrabi et al.: Improvement of AISI 4340 steel properties by intermediate quenching
Table 3. Calculated volume fractions of different phases.
Heat treatment Ferrite volume fraction (%)
Q&T 0 100
IQ1 51
IQ2 39
IQ1&T 57
IQ2&T 65
In Fig. 1e, it is clear that in addition to the formation of
carbide and cementite at the grain boundaries, there are
many martensite islands between the ferrite grains. But in
Fig. 1f, it can be seen that the number of martensite islands
has decreased and small islands are located among the fer-
rite grains, while the lathy martensite has remained at the
ferrite boundaries. During tempering the dual-phase micro-
structure at 210 8C, the carbon of martensite and ferrite dif-
fused to austenite, and iron carbides formed at the grain
boundaries. In fact, because of tempering, all the carbides
coarsened, causing carbon depletion. For this reason, there
exists the possibility of the transformation of unstable mar-
tensite and reduction of martensite volume fraction. Also,
during the tempering cycle, the closed boundaries, marten-
sitic islands, and plates decreased and the dislocation den-
sity reduced. After tempering the dual-phase microstruc-
tures at 210 8C, the formed or coarsened carbides have
reduced the carbon of martensite, retained austenite and fer-
rite, causing a change in volume fraction and morphology
of the unstable martensite.
Therefore, it was discovered that by tempering the dual-
phase microstructure in the range of 200 – 600 8C for 1 h,
the carbon of martensite was depleted to austenite, the mor-
phology of martensite changed and a fraction of austenite
transformed to carbide, cementite or ferrite. Moreover,
martensite volume fraction changed and the cementite in
the boundary of martensite and ferrite was coarsened. Also,
it was found that during the tempering, the dislocation den-
sity in the boundary and inside the ferrite grains reduced. In
fact, during the tempering process, carbides are formed in
the ferrite grains, which causes the carbon to be depleted
from supersaturated ferrite. Although the formation of the
carbides in ferrite grains reduced the hardness of ferrite,
the presence of these carbides could act as obstacles against
dislocation motion [18, 27 – 29].
3.2. Hardness
The hardnesses of the specimens prepared by different heat
treatments and the percentage of different phases are shown
in Fig. 2 and Table 3, respectively.
As can be seen, the hardness of the normalized sample
with fine ferritic–pearlitic microstructure was 32 HRC.
The highest hardness was for the tempered martensite sam-
ple (57 HRC). Furthermore, IQ1 and IQ2, which experi-
enced the intercritical temperatures of 720 8C and 760 8C,
showed hardnesses of 40 and 43 HRC, respectively. This
can be attributed to the higher intercritical temperature of
IQ2 compared to IQ1 treatment, which resulted in higher
martensite fraction (61 %). Additionally, the martensite
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 111 (2020) 9
Martensite volume fraction (%) Average diameter of ferrite
grains (lm)
–
49 4.2
61 3.2
43 4.3
35 3.2
morphology was finer and the dislocation density percent-
age was higher in IQ2. Therefore, IQ2 was harder than
IQ1. By tempering the IQ1 and IQ2 at 210 8C, the disloca-
tion density in the ferrite grains decreased, resulting in low
ferrite hardness, plus martensite volume fraction declined
and its morphology changed. Researchers have demon-
strated that the above-mentioned reasons can lead to a re-
duction in the hardness of IQ1&T and IQ2&T in compari-
son to IQ1 and IQ2, respectively [16, 30, 31]. Earlier it
was indicated that martensitic hardness decreased with in-
creasing martensitic volume fraction and reduction of its
carbon content. Additionally, by increasing the martensite
volume fraction and decreasing the ferrite grain size, more
dislocations accumulate in the ferrite grains, which annihi-
lated by tempering at 200 8C for 1 h. This increase in dislo-
cation density led to an increase in the hardness of ferrite
in dual-phase steels [27, 32, 33].
3.3. Tensile properties
The data obtained from the tensile testing of the specimens
are presented in Table 4. In this table, the highest strength
is related to Q&T. On the other hand, among dual-phase mi-
crostructures, IQ1 and IQ2&T have the highest and the low-
est strengths, respectively.
According to Table 4, it can be seen that Q&T had yield
and tensile strengths of 1 692.5 and 1 824.68 MPa, respec-
tively. Hence, the sample was considered as UHSS. Low
elongation (8.62 %) and high hardness of Q&T implies the
very low formability of this structure. Based on the results,
IQ1 had higher formability than Q&T since its yield
strength to tensile strength ratio is 0.89, which indicates
the higher deformation ability of the IQ1 microstructure.
IQ2 with a ferritic–martensitic dual-phase microstructure
Fig. 2. Hardness of the samples prepared by different heat treatments.
775
A. Mehrabi et al.: Improvement of AISI 4340 steel properties by intermediate quenching
Table 4. Tensile test data for different samples.
Heat treatment Yield strength (YS) Ultimate tensile strength
(MPa) (UTS) (MPa)
N 600 730
Q&T 1 692.5 1 825.6
IQ1 812.6 916.6
IQ2 700 911.5
IQ1&T 850 960.3
IQ2&T 454.6 658.5
and hardness of 43 HRC has a lower strength and higher
hardness compared to IQ1, which is due to high martensite
volume fraction and elevated dislocation density in ferrite
grains.
By comparing and analyzing the heat treatment parame-
ters, it was determined that due to the increase in the mar-
tensite volume fraction and high hardness of ferrite in IQ2,
compared to the IQ1, the hardness of IQ2 was 3 HRC high-
er than IQ1. This is important because martensite plays a re-
inforcing role in a dual-phase microstructure and its hard-
ness affects the strength of the dual-phase steel. However,
with an increase in the martensitic volume fraction and
hardness of IQ2, it was expected that the strength of IQ2
microstructure would be much higher than IQ1. On the con-
trary, by comparing the tensile properties it was seen that
the tensile strength of IQ2 was not only equal but also lower
than IQ1 (112.6 MPa lower). This is inconsistent with pre-
vious results regarding the mechanical properties of dual-
phase steel. Early studies claimed that by increasing the
martensite volume fraction, the strength of dual-phase
steels increased but since the martensite hardness in the
dual-phase microstructure was the controlling parameter
for strength, the strength of these steels did not increase in
linear dependence. It was reported that the reduction in
hardness of martensite could be due to many factors includ-
ing carbide formation during the first cycle of IQ treatment
and lack of dissolution of entire carbides during this treat-
ment [34]. The strength of dual-phase steels could be in-
creased by improving the hardness of ferrite and martensite,
and parameters contributing to increasing dislocation den-
sity in these phases [35]. For instance, by referring to the
Hall–Petch equation Peng and Preban indicated that with
decreasing ferrite grain size, both yield and tensile strengths
of dual-phase steels improved. They contended that it was
due to the increase of ferrite grain boundaries, which led to
increased ferrite/martensite interfaces in addition to high
dislocation density in the grain and grain boundaries, and
improve the hardness of ferrite [36]. Also, Li et al. also
proved that the strength of HSLA dual-phase steels directly
depended on the hardness of martensite. They showed that
the strength of dual-phase steels did not rise linearly with
the increase of the martensitic volume fraction due to the
reduction of martensite carbon content and the hardness of
martensite after increasing the martensite volume fraction
[37]. Similarly, for IQ1&T due to the high carbon content
of martensite in IQ1, there was no significant change in
martensite morphology after tempering (Fig. 1e) and its is-
land-like morphology was kept almost intact. These islands
prevented the dislocation motion and increased the disloca-
tion density during loading. It was evident that martensite
776
YS/UTS ratio Elongation (%)
0.822 12.67
0.93 8.62
0.89 19.5
0.768 23
0.885 18.64
0.69 23.43
carbon content and dislocation density declined during tem-
pering. As a result, the hardness of the IQ1 after tempering
reduced by 3 HRC (i. e. IQ1&T). Of course, many fine car-
bides were formed and dispersed in IQ1&T microstructure
in both ferrite and martensite phases. The distribution of
fine and hard carbide particles in both phases and the pre-
sence of island-like martensite caused the locking of many
dislocations during loading that improved the strength of
IQ1&T.
For IQ2&T, martensite carbon content decreased due to
the low carbon content of martensite and ferrite, presence
of primary carbides in IQ2 microstructure, the formation
of secondary carbides and growth of carbides during tem-
pering. However, since the carbon content of martensite in
IQ2 was higher than in IQ1, after tempering treatment the
decline of martensite volume fraction was more severe in
IQ2&T than IQ1&T. On the other side, the morphology of
martensite in the IQ2&T changed further and the number
of martensite islands decreased and became finer. This
change in morphology facilitated dislocation motion and
the annihilation of dislocations during tempering resulted
in severe strength drop in IQ2&T. It was shown that a great
reduction of strength in dual-phase steels took place by
tempering at a certain temperature because of carbide coar-
sening and decline of martensite volume fraction [37].
3.4. Impact test
Most of the previous studies around the AISI 4340 steel
have been carried out to improve the impact properties. In
the present study, it was attempted to achieve the highest
impact properties ever reported via intercritical quenching
and formation of dual-phase microstructure (Fig. 3).
Fig. 3. Impact energy of the specimens with different heat treatments.
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 111 (2020) 9
A. Mehrabi et al.: Improvement of AISI 4340 steel properties by intermediate quenching
The normalized (N) sample with pearlitic microstructure
had the lowest impact energy due to the non-uniform struc-
ture of pearlite, which included ferrite and cementite layers.
Upon impact, with the separation of soft ferrite layers from
hard cementite layers, a suitable path for cracks was provided,
thus it was fractured more easily [16]. As can be seen in
Fig. 3, the impact energy of Q&T with the tempered marten-
sitic microstructure was very low. The elongation and form-
ability of this microstructure are very low (Table 4). There-
fore, conventional heat treatments do not create desirable
impact properties for AISI 4340 steel. So, the main limita-
tions of Q&T treatment are brittleness and low impact energy.
IQ1 and IQ2 had impact energies of 81.69 and 93.6 kJ m–2,
respectively. As indicated by the microstructure of IQ2
(Fig. 1d), after treatment, martensite volume fraction in-
creased higher than IQ1 and, due to this increase, the mar-
tensite carbon content reduced. As a result, the hardness
and brittleness of martensite declined, while the capacity
for plastic deformation improved further in comparison to
IQ1. Furthermore, the reduction of ferrite grain size in
IQ2 caused a more fine-grained microstructure and in-
creased the grain boundaries. Based on these reasons, the
impact energy of IQ2 increased by 11.91 kJ m–2 compared
to the IQ1. With increasing the martensite volume fraction
in dual-phase microstructure, the hardness and brittleness
of martensite decreased, while the impact energy improved
[38].
IQ1&T had low formability due to hard fine carbide par-
ticles, which were dispersed in martensite and ferrite
phases. As a result, the elongation of IQ1&T decreased
compared to IQ1 (Table 4). Since the elongation of IQ1&T
was lower than IQ1, as was expected, the impact energy of
IQ1&T was also lower than IQ1. Certainly, the presence of
carbides as layers at the ferrite grain boundaries, which
caused non-uniformity in the structure, played a role in the
impact energy reduction of IQ1&T.
Due to the low carbon content of martensite in IQ2,
IQ2&T had even lower carbon in the martensite structure,
therefore, island-like morphology decreased severely and
martensite was formed mostly at ferrite grain boundaries.
Moreover, a portion of hard carbides grew in the ferrite
grain boundaries (Fig. 1f). Based on the reasons mentioned
above, the toughness and elongation of IQ2&T increased
significantly, but its impact energy dropped to 90.6 kJ m–2.
This was due to the non-uniformity of the phases in the mi-
crostructure, which was mentioned earlier. This non-unifor-
mity provided a suitable path for the propagation of cracks.
Thus, IQ2&T was fractured absorbing less energy (3 kJ m–2
lower) than IQ2 [11, 30, 31].
3.5. Fractography
In this section, the fracture surfaces of tensile samples were
analyzed using SEM. Since the chemical composition of
AISI 4340 steel had the minimum percentage of sulfur and
phosphorus, and 2 wt.% nickel, the specimens did not ex-
perience cleavage and brittle fractures. Meanwhile, it
should be noted that since the elongation of the four dual-
phase samples was high, the fracture surfaces were similar
(i. e. the samples experienced ductile fracture), except for
Q&T which showed a quasi-cleavage fracture. Figure 4
shows the elongation at fracture of the samples with respect
to the ascending values.
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 111 (2020) 9
Fig. 4. Elongation at fracture of different specimens with respect to as-
cending values.
Figure 5 shows the SEM micrographs of fracture sur-
faces of tensile test samples with respect to ascending elon-
gation values. It can be observed that by increasing the
elongation, the fiber-like region has become finer and more
delicate. Figure 5a and b displays SEM images of the frac-
ture surfaces of Q&T and N, respectively. The cleavages
can be identified as gray flat areas on the fracture surface
of Q&T. However, there is no cleavage apparent at the frac-
ture surface of the normalized sample, indicating ductile
fracture. In this figure, it is evident that IQ1 (Fig. 5d) has
larger cavities than IQ1&T (Fig. 5c), which is due to the
highly ductile fracture of IQ1. Although IQ2&T (Fig. 5f)
had higher elongation value compared to IQ2 (Fig. 5e),
IQ2 has more cavities on the fracture surface. It can be im-
plied that tempering treatment not only does not induce
ductile fracture but also results in more brittle fracture. In
this line of inquiry, Odeshi et al. reported that the formation
of a thick layer of hard phase between the soft ferrite grains
was responsible for this [39, 40].
4. Conclusions
Although the quench & temper treatment induces very high
strength in AISI 4340 steel, this treatment is associated with
low toughness and poor impact properties. On the other
hand, the intercritical quenching (IQ) treatment can provide
a desirable combination of impact energy and strength. In
the present investigation, by applying intercritical quench-
ing treatment at 720 8C and 760 8C, two different ferritic–
martensitic dual-phase microstructures were obtained. The
mechanical performance was then compared to tempered
dual-phase microstructure and conventional Q&T treat-
ment. The concluding remarks are as follows:
. The application of IQ treatment on AISI 4340 steel re-
sults in the formation of a ferritic–martensitic dual-
phase microstructure with uniform distribution of mar-
tensite with lathy and plate-like morphology.
. During IQ heat treatment, the probability of the forma-
tion of carbides in the microstructure is much greater
than the sequence quenching heat treatment. Moreover,
during the IQ path, carbides are not entirely dissolved.
. Due to the lack of dissolution of all carbides in austenite
during IQ treatment and formation of both lathy and
plate martensite, the strength of the dual-phase samples
is sufficiently high.
777
A. Mehrabi et al.: Improvement of AISI 4340 steel properties by intermediate quenching

. The dual-phase microstructure of AISI 4340 steel, ob-
tained by IQ treatment has the highest toughness, the
highest elongation and the highest impact energy ever
reported. Analyzing the fracture surfaces confirmed the
ductile fracture mechanism, which is desirable.
. Tempering of ferritic–martensitic dual-phase micro-
structure reduces the hardness of the steel but does not
have a significant effect on elongation, impact energy
and strength ratio. On the other hand, it may reduce or
increase the strength depending on the variation of mi-
crostructure and morphology.
. Tempering leads to the emergence and severe growth of
carbides. It can change the morphology of martensite in
a dual-phase microstructure that does not provide desir-
able properties. In general, it can be claimed that the fer-
ritic–martensitic dual-phase microstructure does not re-
quire tempering treatment.

Fig. 5. SEM micrographs of fracture surface of tensile test samples: (a) Q&T, (b) normalized, (c) IQ1&T, (d) IQ1, (e) IQ2, and (f) IQ2&T.

778 Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 111 (2020) 9

A. Mehrabi et al.: Improvement of AISI 4340 steel properties by intermediate quenching

References [28] B. Sadeghi, H. Sharifi, M. Rafiei, M. Tayebi, Eng. Fail. Anal. 94

[1] X.L. Cai, J. Feng, W. Owen: Metall. Trans. A 16 (1985) 1405.
DOI:10.1007/BF02658673
[2] B. Jiang, H. Xuewen, Z. Leyu, W. Haibo, L. Yazheng, G. Fugang:
Met. Mater. Int. (2019) 1. DOI:10.1007/s12540-019-00371-7
[3] W. Liu, J. Lian, S. Münstermann, Eng. Fail. Anal. (2019).
DOI:10.1016/j.engfailanal.2019.08.004
[4] Y. Deng, H. Di, J. Zhang, L. Chen: J. Mater. Eng. Perform. (2019)
1. DOI:10.1051/matecconf/20152108007
[5] Y. Xu, D. Wenjiao, R. Chuang, Z. Weigang: J. Mater. Eng. Per-
form. (2019) 4882. DOI:10.1007/s11665-019-04236-3
[6] Y. Tomita, K. Okabayashi: Metall. Trans. A (1985) 83.
DOI:10.1007/BF02656715
[7] G.Y. Lai, W.E. Wood, R.A. Clark, V.F. Zackay, E.R. Parker: Me-
tall. Trans. (1974) 1663. DOI:10.1007/BF02646340
[8] J.P. Materkowski, G. Krauss: Metall. Trans. A (1979) 1643.
DOI:10.1007/BF02811697
[9] J. Davis, K. Mills, S. Lampman, in: Metals handbook. ASM Inter-
national, Vol. 1, Materials Park, Ohio, USA, (1990) 1063. DOI:.
[10] H. Chandler: Heat treater’s guide: practices and procedures for
irons and steels, ASM international (1994).
[11] Y. Tomita: Int. Mater. Rev. 45 (2000) 27.
DOI:10.1179/095066000771048791
[12] A. Eliasu, S. Boakye-Yiadom: Microsc. Microanal. 25 (2019)
2616. DOI:10.1017/S1431927619013813
[13] H. Sharifi, R. Mazahery, I. Ebrahimzade, A. Rajaee, B. Sadeghi:
Int. J. ISSI 15 (2018) 18.
[14] J. Huang, W. Poole, M. Militzer: Metall. Mater. Trans. A 35
(2004) 3363. DOI:10.1007/s11661-004-0173-x
[15] Y. Tomita: J. Mater. Sci. 27 (1992) 1705.
DOI:10.1007/BF01107194
[16] N. Saeidi, A. Ekrami: Mater. Sci. Eng. A 527 (2010) 5575.
DOI:10.1016/j.msea.2010.05.015
[17] N. Saeidi, A. Ekrami: Mater. Sci. Eng. A 523 (2009) 125.
DOI:10.1016/j.msea.2009.06.057
[18] N. Saeidi, A. Ekrami, in: Defect and Diffusion Forum, Trans Tech
Publ, Vols 312 – 315, (2011).
DOI:10.4028/www.scientific.net/DDF.312-315.110
[19] K.H. Khan, W.E. Wood, Metall. Trans. A 9 (1978) 899.
DOI:10.1007/BF02649833
[20] C. Ghosh, A. Haldar, P. Ghosh, R. Kumar Ray: Int. J. Mater. Res.
101 (2010) 1252. DOI:10.3139/146.110406
[21] M.A. Asadabad, M. Goodarzi, S. Kheirandish: ISIJ Int. 48 (2008)
1251. DOI:10.2355/isijinternational.48.1251
[22] H.M. Soltani, M.A. Asadabad, M. Naderi: Int. J. Mater. Res. 110
(2019) 946. DOI:10.3139/146.111827
[23] Y. Tomita, K. Okabayashi: Metall. Trans. A 18 (1987) 115.
DOI:10.1007/BF02646228
[24] G. Speich, V. Demarest, R. Miller: Metall. Mater. Trans. A 12
(1981) 1419. DOI:10.1007/BF02643686
[25] L. Shi, Y. Zesheng, L. Yongchang, Z. Cheng, Q. Zhixia, N. Bao-
qun, L. Huijun: Mater. Sci. Eng., A 590 (2014) 7.
DOI:10.1016/j.msea.2013.10.006
[26] S.E. Cömert, F. Yener, S. Kır, H. Yazgan: Acta Phys. Pol. A 135
(2019) 684. DOI:10.12693/APhysPolA.135.684
[27] F. Samuel: Mater. Sci. Eng. A 75 (1985) 51.
DOI:10.1016/0025-5416(85)90177-6
(2018) 396. DOI:10.1016/j.engfailanal.2018.08.007
[29] H.M. Soltani, M. Tayebi: J. Alloys Compd. 767 (2018) 112.
DOI:10.1016/j.jallcom.2018.06.302
[30] B.M. Gurumurthy, S. Sharma, A. Kini, S.I. Mansoor: Int. J. Mech.
Eng. Tech. 9 (2018) 84.
[31] S. Sharma, B.M. Gurumurthy, U.A. Kini, A. Hegde, A.S. Patil:
J. Mech. Eng. Sci. 12 (2018) 4018.
DOI:10.15282/jmes.12.4.2018.03.0349
[32] D. Das, P.P. Chattopadhyay: J. Mater. Sci. 44 (2009) 2957.
DOI:10.1007/s10853-009-3392-0
[33] A. Ebrahimian, S.G. Banadkouki: Mater. Sci. Eng. A 677 (2016)
281. DOI:10.1016/j.msea.2016.09.073
[34] H.C. Chen, G.H. Cheng: J. Mater. Sci. 24 (1989) 1991.
DOI:10.1007/BF02385411
[35] P. Movahed, S. Kolahgar, S.P.H. Marashi, M. Pouranvari, N. Parvin:
Mater. Sci. Eng., A 518 (2009) 1. DOI:10.1016/j.msea.2009.05.046
[36] C. Peng-Heng, A. Preban: Acta Metall. 33 (1985) 897.
DOI:10.1016/0001-6160(85)90114-2
[37] H. Li, S. Gao, Y. Tian, D. Terada, A. Shibata, N. Tsuji: Mater.
Today: Proc. 2 (2015) S667. DOI:10.1016/j.matpr.2015.07.372
[38] S.S.M. Tavares, P.D. Pedroza, J.R. Teodo’sio, T. Gurova: Scr.
Mater. 40 (1999) 887. DOI:10.1016/S1359-6462(99)00042-1
[39] A.G. Odeshi, S. Al-ameeri, S. Mirfakhraei, F. Yazdani, M.N. Bas-
sim: Theor. Appl. Fract. Mech. 45 (2006) 18.
DOI:10.1016/j.tafmec.2005.11.005
[40] M. Sabzi, S.M. Far, S.M. Dezfuli: Int. J. Mater. Prod. Technol. 59
(2019) 3. DOI:10.1504/IJMPT.2019.100819
(Received August 16, 2019; accepted June 8, 2020; online
since August 13, 2020)
Correspondence address
Dr. Hassan Sharifi
Department of Materials Science and Engineering
Shahrekord University
Shahrekord
Iran
Tel.: +98 9130316573
E-mail: sharifi@sku.ac.ir
Bibliography
DOI 10.3139/146.111939
Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.)
111 (2020) 9; page 771 – 779
# Carl Hanser Verlag GmbH & Co. KG
ISSN 1862-5282

Int. J. Mater. Res. (formerly Z. Metallkd.) 111 (2020) 9 779