Journal of Materials Processing Technology 211 (2011) 1547–1552

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Materials Processing Technology

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jmatprotec

Thermo-mechanical modelling of residual stresses induced by martensitic phase

transformation and cooling during quenching of railway wheels
Siva N. Lingamanaik ∗ , Bernard K. Chen
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Monash University 3800, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A finite element (FE) method was used to study the formation of residual stresses in low carbon
Received 7 December 2010 bainitic–martensitic rail wheels. The FE model combines a commercially available heat treatment
Received in revised form 12 April 2011 software DANTE to the finite element analysis software ABAQUS. Material data which include thermo-
Accepted 14 April 2011
mechanical properties and kinetics of phase transformations for low carbon bainitic–martensitic (LCBM)
Available online 22 April 2011
steels were obtained from dilatometry experiments and added to DANTE material library. The results
showed that quenching conditions can be designed to promote the development of compressive residual
Keywords:
stresses in the rim of LCBM rail wheels making it possible to produce LCBM steel rail wheels, which have
Residual stress
Quenching
superior properties compared to conventional pearlitic steels.
Railway wheels © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Low-carbon bainitic–martensitic steels
Finite element modelling

1. Introduction
During manufacture, rail wheels are quenched to achieve
favourable mechanical properties as well as to promote beneficial
residual compressive circumferential stress in the rim of the wheel.
Mutton and Lynch (2004) have shown the importance of compres-
sive residual stresses in rail wheels and their role in increasing the
life of rail wheels by retarding the formation and growth of cracks.
Conventional rail wheels are made of medium to high carbon
steels and have a characteristic pearlitic–ferritic microstructure as
reported by Zhang and Gu (2008) and Devanathan and Clayton
(1991). A variety of grades are used within the Australian rail indus-
try ranging from the AAR Class A (nominally 0.47–0.57% C), Class B
(0.57–0.67% C) and Class C (0.67–0.77% C) depending on the type
of service and degree of tread braking involved. Kwon et al. (2006)
have demonstrated that conventional pearlitic wheels are suscep-
tible to the initiation of thermal fatigue cracks at the wheel/rail
contact zone. Significant thermal loads which occur during heavy
tread braking transform the pearlitic steel into brittle martensite
after subsequent rapid cooling of the wheels. Although theories
for the formation of such cracks differ as reported by Mutton and
Boelen (1989), there is evidence that pearlitic steels with higher
carbon content are more susceptible to this problem. Therefore,
compressive residual stresses within the rim of the wheel are seen
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +61 03 990 53647.
E-mail addresses: siva.lingamanaik@monash.edu
(S.N. Lingamanaik), Bernard.Chen@monash.edu (B.K. Chen).
to both retard fatigue crack growth and guard against sudden catas-
trophic failure from large overloads.
Performance of pearlitic steel rail wheels has been improved
mainly by the removal of impurities in steels and strengthening of
wheel steels through the additions of alloying elements as demon-
strated by Yokoyama et al. (2002). Lonsdale and Stone (2002) have
shown the advantages of micro-alloying elements in rail steels in
which hardness levels have been increased up to 321 HB and wear
resistance has also been improved by 20–25% over conventional rail
steels. However, the current trend in heavy haul traffic for heavier
axle loads and higher speeds for passenger trains have seen the
conventional pearlitic steel pushed to their limit and urged the
development of new, stronger and more fatigue resistant steels.
As a result, low carbon bainitic–martensitic (LCBM) steels have
recently been developed as a promising material for rail wheels
as reported by Constable et al. (2006). Constable et al. (2006)
have shown that LCBM steels have superior hardness and strength,
toughness and ductility compared to conventional pearlitic steels.
High hardness levels up to 415 HB have been recorded in LCBM
steels which is an increase of 18% compared to conventional
pearlitic steels. LCBM steels have also showed superior resistance
both to thermal fatigue and formation of cracks which are benefi-
cial for reliability and safety in railway wheels. Lonsdale and Stone
(2002) have shown that martensitic rail wheels could significantly
improve wear resistance of rail wheels. However, the effects of
austenitic to martensitic phase transformation which causes a net
volumetric expansion during quenching of LCBM steel rail wheels
on the residual stress distribution in the rim of rail wheel have not
been adequately evaluated.

0924-0136/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2011.04.007
1548 S.N. Lingamanaik, B.K. Chen / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 211 (2011) 1547–1552
Therefore, the aim of this paper is firstly to determine if the
conventional rail wheel quenching process applied to LCBM steel
rail wheel will result in sufficiently high compressive residual
stresses in the rim of the wheel required to retard the initiation and
propagation of cracks: achieving the compressive residual stresses
equivalent to those attained in pearlitic steel rail wheels. If this
is unsuccessful i.e. if conventional quenching process results in
relatively low compressive residual stresses or even tensile resid-
ual stresses in the rim of the LCBM rail wheel, then, the next aim
would be to determine if the quenching conditions can be altered
to achieve the desired level of compressive strength in the rim of
the wheel.
2. Methods
2.1. Development of thermo-mechanical model for quenching
process
In this work, the modelling of quenching rail wheels was carried
out using a commercially available heat treatment software DANTE
3.3® coupled to the finite element analysis software ABAQUS.
DANTE 3.3® (Deformation Control Technology) has inbuilt material
data for a range of steel which include the kinetics of metal-
lurgical phase transformation and thermo-mechanical properties
which have been obtained from an expansive range of temperature
dependent tension-compression and dilatometry tests as shown by
Prantil et al. (2003).
In DANTE’s thermal module, heat transfer coefficients are
assigned at surfaces of the model and local temperature and heat
flux histories are calculated. A phase transformation module in
DANTE (based on an internal variable framework) then calculates
and tracks the evolution of the different phases from the local tem-
perature data and also updates the thermal module for latent heat
generation occurring from phase transformations as described by
Bammann et al. (1996).
Phase transformation kinetics parameters can be obtained by
several sources which includes CCT diagrams, TTT diagrams, Jominy
Hardness test and dilatometry data. While TTT diagrams are mainly
used for diffusive transformations such as pearlite, CCT diagrams
offer data for both diffusive and martensitic transformation as
reported by Li et al. (2004). Jominy tests alone are not adequate for
determining kinetic phase transformations since strain–time data
cannot be obtained as shown by Li et al. (2004). However, Li et al.
(2004) demonstrated that Jominy and TTT can be used to verify
kinetic parameters.
In DANTE, dilatometry data are preferred over the above sources
as time, temperature and strain can be obtained from dilatometry
experiments and cooling transformation kinetic parameters can be
easily verified against TTT and CCT data as described by Li et al.
(2004).
DANTE has an inbuilt fitting utility which can be used to obtain
kinetic parameters from dilatometry experiments. For marten-
sitic steels, phase transformation kinetics for martensite have been
determined using the DANTE fitting function and good agreement
has been found between predicted and experimental dilatometry
data as reported by Ferguson et al. (2005). Since TTT and CCT dia-
grams are available for common steels, they provide further checks
on the fitting model performance as shown by Li et al. (2004). Fur-
thermore, dilatometry data can be used and has shown to provide
thermal expansion and various phase transformation strains at dif-
ferent temperatures as described by Li et al. (2004).
DANTE mechanical module/solver is also based on an internal
variable framework to track the evolution of different metal-
lurgical phases as austenite transforms into product phases of
pearlite, bainite and martensite as described by Warke et al. (2009).
Fig. 1. Sample fitted in the jaws of a Gleeble machine.
Material data for the mechanical module are obtained from tem-
perature dependent tension and compression tests as functions of
phases, temperature, carbon content, strain level and strain rate
which therefore takes into account work hardening in the differ-
ent phases. For low alloyed steels, mechanical data were found to
be mainly dependent on time, temperature and carbon content
as reported by Ferguson et al. (2000). Strains induced by phase
transformation and those by thermal contraction are then calcu-
lated (stress–strain response) from the local temperature and phase
fractions as a function of time.
In the absence of material data for LCBM rail wheel steels,
a set of dilatometry experiments were undertaken to determine
and quantify volumetric changes associated with martensite phase
transformation for a number of different cooling rates. Thermal
expansion data and kinetic rate equations from the dilatometry
experiments were incorporated into DANTE in a similar fashion as
described in Warke et al. (2009).
Cylindrical hollow LCBM specimens (length of 0.01 m, outer dia.
∅5 mm and inner dia. ∅3.5 mm) were prepared from LCBM steel
slabs and inserted into the jaws of a Gleeble machine (Fig. 1). Each
specimen was conditioned in the same manner at the start of the
test to remove residual stresses and to ensure that each specimen
has the same starting microstructure. The specimen was heated at a
nominal rate of 1 ◦ C/s to 920 ◦ C, held for 10 min, and then quenched
at the controlled cooling rate to room temperature. Experiments
were repeated with LCBM steels of varying carbon content (0.21%
C, 0.15% C, and 0.10% C) and for different cooling rates (0.9 ◦ C/s,
1.5 ◦ C/s, 3 ◦ C/s and 9 ◦ C/s).
Using DANTE fitting utility, the dilatometry data were used to
determine the kinetic parameters for LCBM steels. Thermal expan-
sion data from the dilatometry experiments were incorporated into
DANTE in a similar fashion as described in Warke et al. (2009).
Experiments for pearlitic steels were previously undertaken by
DANTE and material data are available in DANTE’s proprietary
material library.
2.2. Development of ABAQUS/DANTE FE rail wheel model
The finite element model of the rail wheel was developed using
ABAQUS 6.7.1 and DANTE 3.3® . A two dimensional model of half
the cross-section of an as-forged rail wheel was created using 9999
elements and 10182 nodes (Fig. 2(a)). A selection of four noded and
three noded linear asymmetric heat transfer elements, DC4X4 and
DC3X3 respectively, have been used in the meshing of the thermal
model with an acceptable mesh aspect ratio not greater than 2. An
 S.N. Lingamanaik, B.K. Chen / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 211 (2011) 1547–1552
Fig. 2. (a) Two-dimensional axisymmetric geometry and mesh of half cross-section
of as-forged rail wheel showing wheel sections and surfaces. (b) Dilatometry data
for low carbon bainitic–martensitic steel (0.21% C) at 0.9 ◦ C/s, 1.5 ◦ C/s, 3 ◦ C/s and
9 ◦ C/s.
incremental FE analysis allowed the time–temperature fields from
the heat transfer analysis to be used as time-dependant loadings
for the mechanical analysis in which the residual stresses follow-
ing the quenching process were predicted. The four noded and
three noded bilinear asymmetric stress ABAQUS elements CAX4
and CAX3 respectively were used in the mechanical model analysis.
The boundary conditions and thermo-physical quantities that
have been assumed in the model are listed below:
(1) At the start of the analysis, a stress-free state is assumed for the
rail wheel model as the rail wheel is set to austenization tem-
perature of 871 ◦ C. At this elevated temperature, differential
work hardening which may have been formed during forging
is assumed to be significantly relieved and hence not consid-
ered at the start of the analysis. Subsequent induced strains
during the quenching process and associated work harden-
ing effects have been built into the constitutive equations and
hence accounted for in the prediction of residual stress.
(2) Carbon content of rail wheel is assumed uniform across wheel
and specified at the start of analysis.
(3) Values of heat transfer coefficients for water spray quenching
were based on laboratory experiments as reported by Khulman
and Gallagher (1988). Convection from wheel to water at the
tread region is 3066 W/m2 K and heat loss from wheel to air is
28 W/m2 K.
(4) Surface emissivity of 0.95 and Stefan–Boltzmann constant of
5.67 × 10−8 W/m2 K4 .
(5) Density of steel was 7.83 × 10−6 kg/mm3 .
(6) Elastic modulus of steel was 1.800 × 105 MPa.
(7) Thermal conductivities of individual phases were temper-
ature dependent; austenite = 0.016 + 1.3 × 10−5 (T) W/mm ◦ C;
martensite = 0.025 + 3 × 10−6 (T) W/mm ◦ C.
1549
(8) Specific heat capacities individual phases were temper-
ature dependent; austenite = 370 + 0.298 (T) J/kg◦ C; marten-
site = 450 + 0.387 (T) J/kg◦ C.
2.3. Modelling of quenching process for pearlitic steel and low
carbon bainitic–martensitic steel rail wheels
The combined ABAQUS/DANTE FE model was used to investigate
three different quenching conditions labelled Case A, Case B and
Case C.
In Case A, the conventional quenching process is modelled for
pearlitic rail wheel AAR Class A (0.55% C). The conventional quench-
ing process is modelled in four stages as described by Gordon and
Perlman (1998). The tread of the wheel is first quenched for 120 s
while the other sections of the wheel lose heat through convection
and radiation. The rail wheel is left to dwell at room temperature
for 240 s and then tempered in a 500 ◦ C oven for 5 h followed by air
cooling to room temperature.
The conditions selected in Case A also allowed the predictive
capability of ABAQUS/DANTE FE model to be assessed and com-
pared against experimental data as reported by Mutton and Lynch
(2004).
In Case B, the conventional quenching process (as used in Case
A) is applied to LCBM steel rail wheels.
In Case C, an alternative set of quenching conditions (Table 1)
was applied to LCBM steels rail wheels to determine if favourable
compressive residual stresses can be achieved in the rim region of
the wheel. Instead of quenching only the tread of the wheel (as
in Case A), the inner hub and the tread were also quenched in the
first quenching stage. Following the first quenching stage, the tread
of the wheel is quenched for 1100 s and then left to cool at room
temperature. Dwelling and tempering stages have been omitted in
Case C.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Dilatometry results for low carbon bainitic–martensitic steels
Fig. 2(b) shows the dilatometry curves obtained for low carbon
bainitic–martensitic steels (0.21% C) for different cooling rates of
0.9 ◦ C/s, 1.5 ◦ C/s, 3 ◦ C/s and 9 ◦ C/s. As shown in Fig. 2(b), there is a
small shift in martensite start temperature which is expected to be
dependent on cooling rate. This behaviour is in agreement with that
observed for martensite phase transformation for martensitic steels
as reported by Weise and Fritsche (1997). The relative change of
length in the direction of deformation (dL) depends on the degree of
net volumetric expansion as well as on the fraction of recrystallised
austenite transforming into martensite as described by Weise and
Fritsche (1997). Also, the start temperature in martensite transfor-
mation in LCBM steels is found to be dependent on carbon content.
The martensite phase transformation kinetic equations reflect this
behaviour being a function of both cooling rate and carbon content.
3.2. Residual stress distribution for pearlitic and low carbon
bainitic–martensitic rail wheels
Fig. 3(a) shows the distribution of residual stresses predicted
for AAR Class A (0.55% C) rail wheel under conventional quenching
conditions (Case A). The legend shows the contours of circumfer-
ential stresses (negative and positive signs are used to indicate
compressive stresses and tensile stresses respectively in MPa).
Favourable compressive stresses were predicted on the rim’s sur-
face (≈−500 MPa) and below the tread surface (≈−300 MPa). Also,
neutral stresses and compressive stresses are predicted in plate
section.
1550 S.N. Lingamanaik, B.K. Chen / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 211 (2011) 1547–1552

Table 1
Quenching conditions for pearlitic and LCBM steel rail wheels.

Quench Dwelling Tempering Quench Air cooling

Spray property, Spray property,
HTC = 3066 W/m2 K HTC = 500 W/m2 K

Duration (s) Spray location Duration (s) Spray location

Case A (conventional quenching for pearlitic wheels) 120 Tread Yes Yes N/A N/A Yes
Case B (conventional quenching for LCBM wheels) 120 Tread Yes Yes Yes
Case C (Alternate quenching for LCBM wheels) 120 Tread, Inner Hub N/A N/A 1100 Tread Yes

In Case A, hot austenite in the tread section of the wheel cools
and transforms to pearlite. The rim of the wheel shrinks and a dif-
ferential change in volume is created between the inner rim and the
tread section which results in the inner rim being in tension and
the tread of the rim to be in compression. The final distribution of
residual stresses predicted by the present model for conventional
pearlitic rail wheels is in agreement with finite element analysis of
pearlitic rail wheels by Lonsdale and Stone (2002).
Mutton and Lynch (2004) quantified residual stress distribu-
tions in common rail wheel grades using ultrasonic methods
obtained by summing the stresses along the path of the ultrasonic
wave and plotted as averaged stress values at different locations
below the tread of the wheel (Fig. 3(b)). The results predicted for
AAR Class A (0.55% C) rail wheels by the present model at various
locations in the rim have also been averaged (in a similar fash-
ion) such that they can be compared against experimental data as

Fig. 3. (a) Circumferential stress for AAR Class A (0.55% C) rail wheel under conventional quenching conditions (Case A). (b) Ultrasonic residual stress measurements on
various rail wheel grades as reported by Mutton and Lynch (2004). (c) Circumferential stress for low carbon bainitic–martensitic steel (0.21% C) wheels under conventional
quenching procedure (Case B). (d) Circumferential stress for low carbon bainitic–martensitic steel (0.21% C) wheels under alternate quenching procedure (Case C).
 S.N. Lingamanaik, B.K. Chen / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 211 (2011) 1547–1552
reported by Mutton and Lynch (2004). Fig. 3(b) shows the resid-
ual stresses predicted by the ABAQUS/DANTE FE model are in good
agreement with experimental residual stress measurements in rail
wheels.
Fig. 3(c) shows the residual stresses predicted for LCBM rail
wheels under conventional quenching procedure (Case B). High
tensile residual stresses (>550 MPa) were predicted in the rim of
LCBM steel rail wheel which are probably high enough to cause
cracking as the value is of the order of yield stress of LCBM steel
(≈860 MPa).
During quenching of LCBM rail wheels (Case B), the rim shrinks
due to thermal contraction but experiences a net outward expan-
sion due to the martensite phase transforming in the rim, plate and
hub of the wheel. This behaviour is expected in LCBM steels due to
a net volumetric expansion for martensite phase transformation.
Martensite transformation occupies a higher net volumetric expan-
sion compared to pearlite transformation in conventional pearlitic
rail wheels as reported by Lonsdale and Stone (2002).
These results predicted in Case B have been found to be consis-
tent with results of experimental work undertaken by Lonsdale and
Ishler (2001) on 420 monobloc rail wheels which were quenched
at the tread for 240 s and tempered for 4 h. Cuts made in the rim of
the wheel showed a net 0.4 mm (positive) opening displacement in
the tread’s surface which suggests that significant tensile residual
stresses were formed due to quenching in the rim of the wheel.
Quenching conditions (quenching durations, spray locations
and spray configuration) for LCBM steel rail wheels selected in Case
C were shown to result in favourable compressive residual stresses
(≈−300 MPa) in the rim of the wheel. Tensile residual stresses rang-
ing from 70 MPa to 200 MPa were predicted in the plate of the
wheel. However, they are not detrimental since cracks tend to form
mainly in the outer rim of the wheel.
As described in Case B, the hub, plate and the inner rim con-
tribute to the net outward expansion in the tread of the wheel
after the tread has been quenched. By quenching the inner hub in
Case C, martensite is expected first to transform in the hub and the
plate and changes the sequence of martensite phase transformation
which alters the resultant residual stress distribution.
Therefore changes to quenching positions on the wheel and
changes to quenching intensities were found to significantly
change the residual stress distribution in the rim of LCBM rail
wheels. The level of compressive residual stresses in the rim
of LCBM steel rail wheels was found to increase substantially
by selecting appropriate quenching conditions as those used in
Case C.
Khulman and Gallagher (1988) have reported averaged val-
ues for heat transfer coefficients based on experimental work.
However, heat transfer coefficients generally follow a non-linear
relationship with part’s surface temperature due to the various
boiling stages during quenching and the formation of different
regimes which depends on a number of factors such as part’s tem-
perature, part’s geometry, quenching configuration and quenching
medium’s temperature as shown by Schwalm and Tensi (1981).
Therefore, pertinent parameters involved in the quenching process
such as heat transfer coefficients need to be validated against exper-
imental data to confirm the assumed values used in the FE model.
An experimental quenching rig is in its final stage of construction
and will be fitted with thermocouples and real-time data acquisi-
tion devices to provide temperature measurements to verify heat
transfer coefficients used in the computational modelling.
Another issue that needs to be considered is the effect of machin-
ing of the as-forged quenched rail wheel on the final residual stress
distribution. A surface layer of up to 40 mm in thickness (in the
hub) is removed by machining to achieve an accurate dimensional
rail wheel profile. Consequently, the residual stress distribution fol-
lowing quenching of rail wheels is believed to change in which the
1551
residual compressive stresses in the rim of the wheel are expected
to relax. Further work is being undertaken to evaluate more pre-
cisely the changes to the residual stress distribution brought about
by the machining process.
4. Conclusion
Dilatometry experiments for different grades of LCBM steels
were undertaken to quantify the volumetric changes occurring
during martensite phase transformation and the results were incor-
porated in an ABAQUS/DANTE FE model. The residual stresses
predicted by ABAQUS/DANTE FE model were found to be in
agreement with published experimental results. Conventional
quenching process for as-forged pearlitic steel rail wheels resulted
in favourable compressive residual stresses being formed in the
rim of the wheel whereas the conventional quenching process was
found to be unsuitable for LCBM steel rail wheels due to the for-
mation of high levels of tensile stresses in the rim of the wheel.
However, this work has demonstrated that altering the quench-
ing parameters (heat transfer coefficients, quenching duration and
quenching locations) can promote favourable compressive residual
stresses in the rim of LCBM rail wheels.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank CRC for Rail Innovation
(established and supported under the Australian Government’s
Cooperative Research Centres program) for the funding of this
research. Project No. R3.101 New Wheel Steel and also Tim Con-
stable for supporting this work.
References
Bammann, D., Prantil, V., Kumar, A., Lathrop, J., Mosher, D., Callabresi, M., Lusk, M.,
Krauss, G., Jou, H., Elliot, W., Ludtka, G., Dowling, W., Nikkel, D., Lowe, T., Shick, D.,
1996. Development of a carburizing and quenching simulation tool: a material
model for low carbon steels undergoing phase transformations. In: American
Society of Metals 2nd International Conference on Quenching and Control of
Distortion , Cleveland, OH.
Constable, T., Boelen, R., Pereloma, E., 2006. Improved performance for wheels
through the development of low carbon bainitic–martensitic steels. In: Con-
ference on Railway Engineering , Melbourne.
Devanathan, R., Clayton, P., 1991. Rolling–sliding wear behaviour of three bainitic
steels. Wear 151, 255–267.
Ferguson, B.L., Li, Z., Freborg, A.M., 2005. Modelling of heat treatment of steel parts.
Computational Materials Science 34, 274–281.
Ferguson, B., Freborg, A., Petrus, G., 2000. Software simulates quenching. Advanced
Materials and Processes, H31–H36.
Gordon, J., Perlman, B., 1998. Estimation of residual stresses in railroad commuter car
wheels following manufacture. In: Proceedings of the International Mechanical
Engineering Congress and Exhibition , CA.
Khulman, C., Gallagher, M., 1988. The significance of material properties on stresses
developed during quenching of railroad wheels. In: Proceedings of the 1988 Joint
ASME/IEEE Railroad Conference , Chicago, IL.
Kwon, S., Lee, D., Kwon, S.T., 2006. Failure analysis of railway tread. Key Engineering
Materials 321–323, 649–653.
Li, Z., Ferguson, L., Freborg, A.M., 2004. Data needs for modelling heat treatment of
steel parts. Material Science and Technology 2, 219–226.
Lonsdale, C.P., Ishler, L.W., 2001. Development of locomotive wheels for improved
adhesion and life. In: Proceedings of IEEE/ASME Joint Railroad , pp. 29–34.
Lonsdale, C., Stone, D., 2002. Some possible alternatives for longer-life locomotive
wheels. In: Proceedings of IMECE02 , New Orleans, LA.
Mutton, P., Boelen, R., 1989. Wheels developments for high axle load operations. In:
Proceedings of Fourth International Heavy Haul Railway Conference , Brisbane,
Australia.
Mutton, P., Lynch, M.R., 2004. Improving the safety of railway wheels through non-
destructive measurement of residual stresses. In: Proceedings of Conference on
Railway Engineering , Darwin.
Prantil, V.C., Callabresi, M.L., Lathrop, J.F., 2003. Simulating distortion and residual
stresses in carburized thin strips. Journal of Engineering Materials and Technol-
ogy 125, 116–124.
Schwalm, M., Tensi, H.M., 1981. Surface reactions during immersion quenching of
metallic parts. In: Proceedings of the Technical Association of the Pulp and Paper
industry , pp. 563–572.
1552 S.N. Lingamanaik, B.K. Chen / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 211 (2011) 1547–1552

Warke, V.S., Sisson, R.D., Makhlouf, M.M., 2009. FEA model for predicting the
response of powder metallurgy steel components to heat treatment. Materials
Science and Engineering A 518, 7–15.
Weise, A., Fritsche, G., 1997. Martensitic transformation and residual stress gen-
eration during thermomechanical treatment. Materials and Manufacturing
Processes 12 (1), 125–135.
Yokoyama, H., Mitao, S., Takemasa, M., 2002. Development of high strength pearlitic
rail (SP Rail) with excellent wear and damage resistance. NKK Technical Report
176, pp. 59–64.
Zhang, M., Gu, H., 2008. Microstructure and mechanical properties of railway wheels
manufactured with low-medium carbon Si–Mn–Mo–V steel. Journal of Univer-
sity of Science and Technology Beijing. 15 (2), 125.