TECHNICAL FIELD
[0001] The disclosure relates to a case hardening steel applied for machine structure components
used in the field of construction machinery and automobiles, in particular to a case
hardening steel having excellent cold forgeability and excellent fatigue strength
after carburizing treatment.
BACKGROUND
[0002] For example, since an automobile component or the like is produced by cold forming
a steel bar, the material therefor is required to have good cold forgeability. Therefore,
the material is normally subjected to softening annealing to spheroidize carbide and
improve cold forgeability. Further, in terms of the chemical composition of steel,
proposals have been made to reduce the content of Si which greatly affects deformation
resistance.
[0003] EP2530178 discloses a case hardening steel excellent in cold forgeability, has high fatigue
strength after carburization, and suitably serves as a material for mechanical structures
in the fields of construction machinery and automobiles.
[0004] JP2006152330 discloses a case hardening steel with high fatigue strength after carburization,
good cold forgeability used for machine structural member parts.
[0005] PTL 1 (
JP3623313B) discloses that, by reducing Si content and, further by reducing the amount of other
alloying elements to such an extent as to compensate for the quench hardenability
improving effect provided by dissolved B, hardness is decreased and cold forgeability
is improved.
[0006] Further, PTL 2 (
JP3764586B) proposes a case hardening steel ensuring cold workability obtained by combining
a chemical composition where Si and Mn which are solid-solution-strengthening elements
are reduced and quench hardenability is ensured by dissolved B, with certain production
conditions.
CITATION LIST
Patent Literature
[0008] The techniques disclosed in PTLs 1 and 2 utilize the quench hardenability improving
effect provided by B. However, the quench hardenability improving effect of B is greatly
influenced by the cooling rate. On the other hand, since most cold-forged products
have complicated shapes, the cooling rate inside components at the time of carburizing
and quenching tends to become non-uniform and as a result, dimensional accuracy after
carburizing treatment decreases, or component strength becomes insufficient.
Further, although Ti is added to prevent a reduction in quench hardenability improving
effect of B, since nitrides of Ti are generated in the solidification stage of casting,
they tend to become coarse, and become the origin of fatigue fracture to shorten the
lifetime of components.
[0009] It could thus be helpful to provide a case hardening steel exhibiting good cold forgeability
and having excellent fatigue strength after carburizing treatment.
SUMMARY
[0010] As a result of intensive studies regarding the chemical compositions of case hardening
steels, we discovered that by applying an appropriate chemical composition and appropriately
managing the addition amount of Si, Cr, and Mn, a case hardening steel with excellent
cold forgeability and fatigue strength can be obtained.
[0011] This disclosure is based on these findings. We thus provide:
- (1) A case hardening steel having a chemical composition containing
C: 0.10 mass% to 0.35 mass%,
Si: 0.01 mass% to 0.13 mass%,
Mn: 0.30 mass% to 0.80 mass%,
P: 0.02 mass% or less,
S: 0.03 mass% or less,
Al: 0.01 mass% to 0.045 mass%,
Cr: 0.5 mass% to 3.0 mass%,
B: 0.0005 mass% to 0.0040 mass%,
Nb: 0.003 mass% to 0.080 mass%, and
N: 0.0080 mass% or less
in a range satisfying following formulas (1) and (2),
Ti as an impurity: 0.005 mass% or less, and
the balance being Fe and incidental impurities:


where [%M] represents the content of element M (mass%).
- (2) The case hardening steel according to aspect (1) wherein the chemical composition
further contains one or more of
Cu: 0.5 mass% or less,
Ni: 0.5 mass% or less, and
V: 0.1 mass% or less.
[0012] With this disclosure, a case hardening steel with both excellent cold forgeability
and high fatigue strength can be provided.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0013] In the accompanying drawings:
FIG. 1 is a graph showing the mean hardness of a material after carburizing made from
a steel material containing 0.048 mass% of Al, in positions from the surface to a
position 4 mm inside the material, and the hardness range measured.
FIG. 2 is a graph showing the mean hardness of a material after carburizing made from
a steel material containing 0.043 mass% of Al, in positions from the surface to a
position 4 mm inside the material, and the hardness range measured.
FIG. 3 is a graph showing the relationship between Al content and the maximum value
of hardness variation.
FIG. 4 is a graph showing the relationship between the balance of addition amounts
of Si and Mn, and the increase in deformation resistance.
FIG. 5 shows the shape of the V-grooved cold forgeability test piece for evaluation
of critical upset ratio.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0014] In the following, reasons for the limiting the steel composition of the case hardening
steel of the disclosure to the aforementioned range will be explained in detail.
C: 0.10 mass% to 0.35 mass%
[0015] In order to perform quenching after carburizing heat treatment on the cold-forged
product to increase the hardness of the central part of the forged product, 0.10 mass%
or more of C is required. On the other hand, if C content exceeds 0.35 mass%, toughness
of the core decreases, and therefore C content is limited to a range of 0.10 mass%
to 0.35 mass%. The C content is preferably 0.25 mass% or less, and more preferably
0.20 mass% or less.
Si: 0.01 mass% to 0.13 mass%
[0016] Si is required as a deoxidizing agent, and needs to be added in an amount of at least
0.01 mass%. However, Si is an element which is preferentially oxidized in the carburized
surface layer and facilitates grain boundary oxidization. Further, it causes solid
solution strengthening of ferrite and increases deformation resistance to deteriorate
cold forgeability. Therefore, the upper limit of Si content is 0.13 mass%. The Si
content is preferably 0.02 mass% to 0.10 mass%, and more preferably 0.02 mass% to
0.09 mass%.
Mn: 0.30 mass% to 0.80 mass%
[0017] Mn is an effective element for improving quench hardenability, and needs to be added
in an amount of at least 0.30 mass%. However, since excessive addition of Mn would
result in an increase in deformation resistance caused by solid solution strengthening,
the upper limit of Mn content is 0.80 mass%. The Mn content is preferably 0,60 mass%
or less, and more preferably 0.55 mass% or less.
P: 0.02 mass% or less
[0018] Since P segregates in crystal grain boundaries and reduces toughness, it is desirable
for the content thereof to be as low as possible. However, a content thereof of up
to 0.02 mass% would be tolerable. The P content is preferably 0.018 mass% or less.
Further, although a lower limit thereof does not need to be limited to a particular
value, considering that unnecessary reduction of P would lengthen refining time and
increase refining costs, P content should be 0.012 % or more.
S: 0.03 mass% or less
[0019] S is an element which exists as a sulfide inclusion which is effective in improving
machinability by cutting. However, since excessively adding S would lead to a reduction
of cold forgeability, the upper limit thereof is 0.03 mass%. Further, although there
is no particular lower limit, it may be set to 0.012 % or more for the purpose of
guaranteeing machinability by cutting.
Al: 0.01 mass% to 0.045 mass%
[0020] If Al is excessively added, it fixes with N within steel as AIN, and develops a quench
hardenability improving effect provided by B. In order to stabilize component strength
after carburizing treatment, it is important to prevent the development of the quench
hardenability improving effect provided by B, and in order to do so, the upper limit
of Al needs to be 0.045 mass%.
[0021] The mean hardness of materials after carburizing, each containing 10 ppm of B and
45 ppm of N, and with an Al addition amount of 0.048 mass% (FIG. 1) and 0.043 mass%
(FIG. 2), respectively, in positions from the surface to a position 4 mm inside the
material, and the hardness range measured are shown in FIG. 1 and FIG. 2.
[0022] As it is clear from FIG. 1 and FIG. 2, when the Al content is 0.048 mass% (FIG. 1),
the hardness range measured (the range between the upper and lower broken lines in
the figure) in each depth position from the surface (the horizontal axis in the figure)
is larger than that of when the Al content is 0,043 mass% (FIG. 2), and there is a
large variation in hardness in each depth position.
[0023] FIG. 3 shows the changes in the maximum value of hardness variation (the maximum
value in the vertical axis direction between the upper and lower broken lines in FIG.
1 or FIG. 2) when 10 ppm of B and 45 ppm of N are contained with varying Al addition
amounts.
[0024] As it is clear from FIG. 3, by setting the Al addition amount to 0,045 mass% or less,
the variation of hardness from the surface of the material after carburizing to the
inside thereof is reduced. Based on the above results, the upper limit value of Al
content is set to 0.045 mass%.
[0025] Experiments for which results are shown in FIG. 1 to FIG. 3 were conducted under
the following conditions. The steel used in the experiments contained C: 0.16 mass%,
Si: 0.09 mass%, Mn: 0.53 mass%, P: 0.012 mass%, S: 0.012 mass%, Cr: 1.9 mass%, B:
0.0015 mass%, Nb: 0.025 mass%, and N: 0.0065 mass%, the Al addition amount being as
described above, and the balance including Fe and incidental impurities. After the
steel was processed into a round bar having a diameter of 25 mm, it was subjected
to carburizing at 930 °C for 3 hours with a carbon potential of 1.0 mass%, then oil
quenched at 60 °C, and then tempered at 180 °C for 1 hour. The hardness from the surface
of the cross section of the tempered round bar to the position 4 mm inside was measured
in the same cross section in 10 areas per depth position to obtain the mean value,
maximum value and the minimum value of Vickers hardness in each depth position from
the surface.
[0026] On the other hand, since Al is an effective element for deoxidization, the lower
limit thereof is 0.01 mass%. The content thereof is preferably 0.01 mass% to 0.040
mass%, and more preferably 0.015 mass% to 0.035 mass%.
Cr: 0.5 mass% to 3.0 mass%
[0027] Cr contributes to improving not only quench hardenability but also resistance to
temper softening, and is also an effective element for facilitating spheroidization
of carbide. However, if Cr content is less than 0.5 mass%, the addition effect is
limited. On the other hand, if it exceeds 3.0 mass%, it facilitates excessive carburizing
or generation of retained austenite and adversely effects fatigue strength. Therefore,
Cr content is limited to a range of 0.5 mass% to 3.0 mass%. It is preferably in the
range of 0.7 mass% to 2.5 mass%.
B: 0.0005 mass% to 0.0040 mass%
[0028] B bonds, inside the steel, with N and has an effect of reducing dissolved N. Therefore,
it is possible to reduce dynamic strain aging at the time of cold forging caused by
dissolved N, and contributes to reducing the deformation resistance during forging.
In order to obtain this effect, 0.0005 % or more of B needs to be added. On the other
hand, if B content exceeds 0.0040 %, the effect of reducing deformation resistance
reaches a plateau, and causes a reduction of toughness. Therefore, B content is limited
to a range of 0.0005 mass% to 0.0040 mass%. More preferably, B content is in the range
of 0.0005 mass% to 0.0030 mass%.
Nb: 0.003 mass% to 0.080 mass%
[0029] Nb forms NbC inside the steel, and inhibits grain coarsening of austenite grains
during carburizing heat treatment by a pinning effect. To obtain this effect, it needs
to be added in an amount of at least 0.003 mass%. On the other hand, if Nb is added
in an amount exceeding 0.080 mass%, it may result in deterioration of grain coarsening
inhibiting ability caused by precipitation of coarse NbC or deterioration of fatigue
strength. Therefore, Nb content is 0.080 mass% or less. It is preferably 0.010 mass%
to 0.060 mass%, and more preferably 0.015 mass% to 0.045 mass%.
Ti: 0.005 mass% or less
[0030] It is important to minimize the Ti content mixed into steel. Ti tends to bond with
N to form coarse TiN, and adding Ti simultaneously with Nb makes it even more likely
to generate coarse precipitates and causes a reduction in fatigue strength. Therefore,
the upper limit of Ti contained as an impurity is 0.005 mass%. More preferably, Ti
content is 0.003 mass% or less.
N: 0.0080 mass% or less
[0031] Since N dissolves in steel to cause dynamic strain aging during cold forging to increase
deformation resistance, it needs to be minimized. Therefore, the amount of N mixed
in is limited to 0.0080 mass% or less. The N content is preferably 0.0070 mass% or
less, and more preferably 0.0065 mass% or less.
[0032] The proper composition ranges of the basic components of the disclosure are as explained
above. However, in this disclosure, it does not suffice for each element to only satisfy
the aforementioned ranges, and it is also important for Si, Mn, and Cr, in particular,
to satisfy the relationships of the following formulas (1) and (2).

where [%M] represents the content of element M (mass%).
[0033] The above formula (1) relates to factors that influence quench hardenability and
temper softening resistancy, and if formula (1) is not satisfied, fatigue strength
after carburizing treatment becomes insufficient. Further, the above formula (2) relates
to factors that influence cold forgeability, and if formula (2) is satisfied, solid
solution strengthening caused by Si and Mn can be inhibited, and thereby deformation
resistance during cold forging can be reduced and die life can be enhanced.
[0034] The increase in deformation resistance was calculated for when only the addition
amounts of Si and Mn were changed, compared to when Si and Mn are not added. As can
be seen from the results shown in FIG. 4, when 3.0[%Si] + 1.0[%Mn] is less than 1,
the increase in deformation resistance is surely inhibited. Here, Experiments for
which results are shown in FIG. 4 were conducted under the following conditions.
[0035] Using a steel containing C: 0.18 mass%, Si: not added, Mn: not added, P: 0.012 mass%,
S: 0.012 mass%, Al: 0.034 mass%, Cr: 1.7 mass%, B: 0.0013 mass%, Nb: 0.030 mass%,
and N: 0.0052 mass%, and the balance including Fe and incidental impurities as the
base material, 12 different steels with varying Si contents in a range of 0.03 mass%
to 0.20 mass%, and varying Mn contents in a range of 0.34 mass% to 1.2 mass%, were
prepared and hot rolled to a diameter of 40 mm. Then, the deformation resistance thereof
was measured with a cold forgeability evaluation method described later, and the increase
in deformation resistance was obtained by comparing with the deformation resistance
of when Si and Mn are not added.
[0036] Although the basic components of the case hardening steel of the disclosure are as
explained above, one or more of Cu: 0.5 mass% or less, Ni: 0.5 mass% or less, and
V: 0.1 mass% or less may also be contained as necessary.
[0037] Since Cu is an effective element for improving quench hardenability, it is preferably
added in an amount of 0.05 mass% or more. However, excessively adding Cu would cause
deterioration of surface characteristics of the steel sheet and increase alloy costs.
Therefore, the upper limit thereof is 0.5 mass%.
[0038] Since Ni and V are effective elements for improving quench hardenability and toughness,
they are preferably contained respectively in amounts of 0.05 mass% or more and 0.01
mass% or more. However, since they are expensive, the upper limits of the content
thereof are each limited to 0.5 mass% and 0.1 mass%.
EXAMPLES
[0039] In the following, the constitution and effect of the case hardening steel of the
disclosure will be explained in more detail with reference to the examples. However,
the case hardening steel is not restricted by any means to these examples, which may
be changed appropriately within the range conforming to the purpose of the disclosure,
all of such changes being included within the technical scope of the disclosure.
[0040] A steel having a chemical composition shown in Table 1 was obtained by steelmaking,
and a bloom produced from the molten steel thereof was subjected to hot rolling and
formed into a steel bar of 40mmϕ. Evaluation on cold forgeability was performed for
the obtained steel bar.
[0041] Here, the cold forgeability was evaluated based on two criteria, namely, deformation
resistance and critical upset ratio.
[0042] Test pieces each being in a columnar shape of 15 mm in diameter and 22.5 mm in height
were collected from the steel bars as rolled, the test pieces each having the center
axis positioned at a depth of 1/4 of the diameter D of the steel bar (hereinafter,
this position is referred to as "1/4D position") from the outer periphery thereof.
The columnar test pieces thus obtained each had conical recesses formed at the center
positions on the top and bottom surfaces thereof, the conical recesses each having
a bottom surface of 2 mmϕ in diameter and having a central angle of 120°. The recesses
thus formed were configured to serve as restraint recesses. The columnar test pieces
each further have a V-shaped groove in the side surface thereof, the groove extending
in the height direction of the test piece, so that the test piece was obtained as
a notched columnar test piece. Here, Fig. 5(a) is a top view illustrating the shape
of the notched columnar test piece used for evaluating the cold forgeability, Fig.
5(b) is a side view thereof, and Fig. 5(c) is a view illustrating the detailed dimensions
of the V-shaped groove of Fig. 5(b). In the drawings, reference numeral 1 denotes
the V-shaped groove, 2 denotes the surfaces to be compressed (top and bottom surfaces),
and 3 denotes the conical recesses (restraint recesses).
[0043] The cold forgeability was evaluated as follows. That is, the test pieces were each
subjected to compression test in which a compressive load was applied to each of the
two surfaces 2 to be compressed in a state where the top and bottom surfaces of the
test piece were restrained, to thereby measure the deformability and the deformation
resistance. The deformability was evaluated based on the maximum compressibility to
crack initiation from the floor of the V-groove 1 (referred to as critical upset ratio),
while the deformation resistance was evaluated based on a deformation stress at a
compressibility of 60% (referred to as "60% deformation resistance"). The steel can
be considered excellent in cold forgeability when the critical upset ratio is 50%
or more and the deformation resistance value is 800 MPa or less.
[0044] Next, fatigue properties were evaluated based on two points namely, bending fatigue
and surface fatigue.
[0045] From the 1/4 D position of the above steel bar, a rotary bending test piece for evaluating
bending fatigue strength and a roller pitting test piece for evaluating surface fatigue
strength were collected. These test pieces were subjected to carburizing at 930 °C
for 3 hours with a carbon potential of 1.0 mass%, then oil quenched at 60 °C, and
then tempered at 180 °C for 1 hour. For each carburized test piece, a rotating bending
fatigue test and a roller pitting test was performed. The rotating bending fatigue
test was performed at a speed of 3500 rpm and the fatigue limit strength after 10
7 cycles was evaluated. The roller pitting test was performed under the conditions
of a slip rate of 40 % and an oil temperature of 80 °C, and strength after 10
7 cycles (critical strength at which pitting occurs in test piece surface) was evaluated.
The obtained results are shown in Table 2. With a bending fatigue strength of 800
MPa or more and a surface fatigue strength of 3500 MPa or more, fatigue strength is
considered excellent.
[0046] As shown in Table 2, all of the examples according to the disclosure are excellent
in both cold forgeability and fatigue strength.

[Table 2]
[0047]
Table 2
| No. |
Steel No. |
Cold Forgeability |
Fatigue Strength after Carburizing |
Remarks |
| Deformation Resistance (Mpa) |
Critical Upset Ratio (%) |
Bending Fatigue Strength (MPa) |
Surface Fatigue Strength (MPa) |
| 1 |
A |
701 |
61 |
830 |
3650 |
Example of Disclosure |
| 2 |
B |
721 |
62 |
840 |
3600 |
Example of Disclosure |
| 3 |
C |
725 |
56 |
870 |
3710 |
Example of Disclosure |
| 4 |
D |
741 |
58 |
870 |
3750 |
Example of Disclosure |
| 5 |
E |
753 |
54 |
910 |
3900 |
Example of Disclosure |
| 6 |
F |
750 |
60 |
810 |
3550 |
Example of Disclosure |
| 7 |
G |
755 |
53 |
830 |
3740 |
Example of Disclosure |
| 8 |
H |
779 |
55 |
920 |
3930 |
Example of Disclosure |
| 10 |
J |
708 |
68 |
750 |
3420 |
Comparative Example |
| 11 |
K |
821 |
47 |
790 |
3590 |
Comparative Example |
| 12 |
L |
830 |
45 |
840 |
3600 |
Comparative Example |
| 13 |
M |
819 |
49 |
890 |
3680 |
Comparative Example |
| 14 |
N |
750 |
55 |
810 |
3450 |
Comparative Example |
| 15 |
O |
815 |
42 |
840 |
3540 |
Comparative Example |
| 16 |
P |
805 |
48 |
790 |
3400 |
Comparative Example |
| 17 |
Q |
812 |
54 |
740 |
3560 |
Comparative Example |
| 18 |
R |
820 |
48 |
820 |
3600 |
Comparative Example |
| 19 |
S |
740 |
54 |
720 |
3370 |
Comparative Example |
| 20 |
T |
788 |
53 |
780 |
3300 |
Comparative Example |
| 21 |
U |
725 |
61 |
840 |
3420 |
Comparative Example |
| 22 |
V |
780 |
54 |
760 |
3460 |
Comparative Example |
| 23 |
W |
751 |
58 |
790 |
3420 |
Comparative Example |
| 24 |
X |
804 |
49 |
830 |
3550 |
Comparative Example |
REFERENCE SIGNS LIST
[0048]
- 1 V-shaped Groove
- 2 Surfaces to be Compressed (Top and Bottom Surfaces)
- 3 Conical Recesses (Restraint Recesses)