ASM Online Member Community

 View Only
Register for Upcoming Events
Back to discussions
Expand all | Collapse all

Material Identification

  • 1.  Material Identification

    Posted 11-21-2022 12:11

    I would appreciate if anyone could let me know if they are familiar with Steel EH.82.

    The chemical composition of the sample does not correspond to any known alloy:

     

     

     

    Thank you.

     

    Best,

    Darko Babic

    o: 480-941-6598

    c: 480-242-2446

     

    www.smtlabsllc.com

     

     

    This communication, including attachments, is confidential, may be subject to legal privileges, and is intended for the sole use of the addressee. Any use, duplication, disclosure or dissemination of this communication, other than by the addressee, is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete or destroy this communication and all copies.

     



  • 2.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-22-2022 10:11
    I would consider the possibility that the sample did not meet the intended chemistry, either because the entire heat of steel was wrong, or the specific sample was off due to segregation. ASTM allows larger ranges when analyzing a single sample from a heat of steel, compared to the proper analysis of the heat based on an average of first, middle, and last samples.

    I use the ASM Alloy Finder database. If I can't identify an alloy, I usually put a small range on each element with the measured value being in the middle. So, for carbon I might search for 0.23 to 0.33. I would not include copper, silicon, sulfur, or phosphorus in the search. The copper, for example, might not be an intentional alloy addition and could exceed the maximum copper level for some alloys that would otherwise qualify.

    ------------------------------
    Ken Kirby
    Snap-on, Inc.
    Kenosha WI
    (262) 748-3836
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-22-2022 12:14

    Thank you!

    I thought the same things and have advised the client of the possibility of a one-off lot.

    But I figured that someone may know the EH.82 spec and chemistry of hand.

    Btw, I do the same with alloy finding data base. A very helpful tool. For this particular alloy Ni, Cr, and Mo is the combination I used and could not find a great match. Although, some 3000, 4000, and 9000, series steel alloys have composition that are somewhat close (analyzed chemistry: 2.85NI, 0.68Cr, 0.5Mo):

    1. 3430 (3Ni, 0.77Cr, 0Mo)
    2. 4330 (1.65-2Ni, 0.4-0.6Cr, 0.2-0.3Mo)
    3. 4830 (3.25-3.75Ni, 0Cr, 0.2-0.3Mo)
    4. 9330 (3-3.5Ni, 1-1.2Cr, 0.08-0.15Mo).

     

    Thanks again.

     

    Best,

    Darko Babic

    o: 480-941-6598

    c: 480-242-2446

     

    www.smtlabsllc.com

     

     

    This communication, including attachments, is confidential, may be subject to legal privileges, and is intended for the sole use of the addressee. Any use, duplication, disclosure or dissemination of this communication, other than by the addressee, is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete or destroy this communication and all copies.

     




    Original Message


  • 4.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-22-2022 14:25
    The composition is unfamiliar.  I am not familiar with European or Asian grades. 

    I would like to ask if it is from a very old part, since the Ni content is somewhat close to some of the SAE / AISI grades in the long-obsolete 3300 or 3500 series.  Alloy systems used in the U.S.A. went away from high Ni grades long ago primarily because equivalent heat treat performance could be obtained at lower expense.  Also the Cu is puzzling, as few steels contain that high of a content.  Could it be a powder metallurgy grade?  Some of those had higher copper for better sintering performance.

    Finally I would ask what was the analysis process, and could it be returning incorrect values due to contamination or from calibration issues?

    I hope my comments are of value.         Paul T.





  • 5.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-28-2022 11:06
    I don't recognize the grade either. What's weird is that there are definitely alloy systems out there with nickel that high (around 3%) and they generally have some Cr/Mo in roughly that concentration (usually higher Cr though, for example HY-100) but the sulfur and copper are both too high since those grades always demand high toughness so the residuals are low, and for that matter the carbon is lower as well. There are grades that have deliberate copper additions for precipitation hardening like 15-5 but in much higher concentration, 10x as much. The copper range is actually around what you'd get in a weathering steel, I wonder if maybe this is some sort of high toughness weathering grade, maybe for high temp applications (on account of the moly)?

    ------------------------------
    Sean Piper
    Product / Process Metallurgist
    Ellwood Texas Forge Houston
    Houston TX
    (713) 434-5138
    ------------------------------



  • 6.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-29-2022 08:40
    I agree with Paul in that the part may be old and may not correspond exactly to current alloys. Also, don't rule out the possibility that the material is out of spec but used anyway, which also is more prevalent in older materials. If you're trying to reverse engineer the part/material, you're close enough to make a decent choice of suitable replacement materials.

    ------------------------------
    Joseph Strauss
    Engineer/President
    H J E COMPANY, INC.,HJE COMPANY, INC.
    Queensbury NY
    (518) 792-8733
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-29-2022 08:56
    It looks like a European grade, 826M31 or EN25, but the Ni is a little high.
    C 0.27-0.31
    Si 0.10-0.40
    Mn 0.45-0.70
    Cr 0.50-0.80
    Mo 0.45-0.65
    Ni 2.30-2.80

    I have a wonderful (but out of print) book called the Atlas of Contuous Cooling Transformation Diagrams for Engineering Steels (M. Atkins, ISBN 0950045144). This looks similar to the chemistry from the diagram on page 110. A little more digging in the book gets the grade, which can be easily found on the internet.

    ------------------------------
    Edward White, P.E.
    ------------------------------



  • 8.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-29-2022 09:08
    I work with China, India, and European steel standards and do not see anything that comes close to matching EH82.

    ------------------------------
    Patrick Mizik
    ASM Chapter Council Vice Chair & District 11 Rep
    Principal Metallurgical Engineer
    Haldex
    pat.mizik@haldex.comPrincipal Metallurgical Engineer
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 9.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-30-2022 10:19
    The EN25 grade, Edward, is a good match.  The Ni is just above the max. by 0.05%, but that could be an analysis error.  Woldmans shows that alloy as being made by Eagle and Globe Steel, with a note:  Heat treated.  For high stress shafts in heavy truck axles, tractor axles and transmission shafts.  That company, out of Sheffield England, went out of business in 1955, but other companies likely made it.  It references the British Standard BS970 826M31.

    ------------------------------
    Gary Coates
    Manager, Technical
    Nickel Institute
    Mississauga ON
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 10.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-29-2022 09:14
    I was just discussing this with a colleague who was wondering if it may be a casting grade, since those sometimes have modified chemistries to improve castability. If you have enough material, you might consider prepping a micro and seeing whether it has a cast structure. If so, that could narrow it down.

    Do you know anything about the application where the material came from, the nature or geometry of the component, etc.? That could also narrow it down.

    ------------------------------
    Sean Piper
    Product / Process Metallurgist
    Ellwood Texas Forge Houston
    Houston TX
    (713) 434-5138
    ------------------------------



  • 11.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-30-2022 12:32
    Nickel has been noted as being a little high compared to materials so far found. I wonder if the difference would have been within the tolerance band to whatever material spec was used.

    ------------------------------
    Aaron Tanzer
    Senior Metallurgical Engineer
    Baton Rouge LA
    (407) 247-9557
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 12.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-30-2022 16:06
    Not sure I can say what the product analysis for that alloy would be, as it looks like it was produced to a British standard, but for ASTM Stainless Steels (which this is not), for Ni contents of 1.00 to 5.00%, it would be 0.07% under or over the specified min. and max. respectively.

    ------------------------------
    Gary Coates
    Manager, Technical
    Nickel Institute
    Mississauga ON
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 13.  RE: Material Identification

    Posted 11-30-2022 21:51
    Yes, there are spec tolerances, and there are analysis tolerances, and depending on the product form there may be local variations within the part. 

    I hope that we will hear back from the original poster about what the product form was, and why the analysis was being done.  With that Ni content, certainly intended for heat treatment and capable of deep hardening, plus probably a very good toughness value.



    Original Message