MICROSTRUCTURE AND MECHANICAL PROPERTIES

OF A BAINITIC PM STEEL
Chris Schade & Tom Murphy
Hoeganaes Corporation
Cinnaminson, NJ 08077

Alan Lawley & Roger Doherty

Drexel University
Philadelphia, PA 19104

ABSTRACT

The microstructures of PM steels are typically pearlitic (predominately in the as sintered

condition) or martensitic (occurring as the result of accelerated cooling or heat treatment). By
design of the alloy system, a predominately bainitic microstructure can be produced in a PM
steel after sintering. In the wrought ferrous industry, bainitic steels are known to exhibit high
strength and hardness and also a high level of toughness. The aim of this research was to develop
a bainitic microstructure in a PM steel that exhibits a high level of strength and toughness with
acceptable ductility. The study focuses on alloy composition and attendant mechanical properties
and microstructure. In addition, processing routes to achieve bainitic and mixed
(pearlitic/bainitic/martensitic) microstructures with the potential to enhance mechanical
properties are reviewed.

INTRODUCTION

PM parts producers continue to explore methods to achieve enhanced mechanical

properties while utilizing lower cost alloys or lower amounts of alloying elements.
Techniques such as micro-alloying, precipitation-hardening and secondary hardening
have been used to accomplish this goal. Recently, wrought steels with a predominately
bainitic microstructure that exhibit a high strength with excellent toughness and ductility
have been developed. These steels are produced utilizing lower alloy contents than used
in predominantly martensitic steels [1-7].

Combining alloy design with direct cooling leads to a fine bainitic microstructure or
mixtures of bainite and martensite that can be used in place of quenched and tempered
(Q&T) steels. Bainite has always been considered a “troublesome” microstructure in PM
steels. Many times in PM steels the formation of bainite is commonly caused by local
variations in alloy content and/or cooling rates. Small amounts of bainite in a pearlitic
microstructure lead to unwanted hard spots while small amounts of bainite in a
martensitic microstructure leads to soft spots, both conditions leading to inferior
properties. In these situations the bainite is coarse and is normally called upper bainite.
With the advent of accelerated cooling in the sintering furnace the possibility of
producing a PM steel with high levels of fine bainite or mixtures of fine bainite and
martensite now appears possible. For a microstructure consisting of fine bainite, strength
follows the Hall-Petch relationship in which the strength is inversely proportional to the
grain size. For a mixed microstructure the steel has a high resistance to cleavage fracture
and void formation due to the absence of coarse eutectoid carbides, thus simultaneously
increasing strength and toughness. In fact, improvements to impact toughness and
ductility can be obtained in martensitic steels by introducing small amounts of lower
bainite.

Bainite is formed over a wide range of temperatures and the microstructure varies. There
are essentially two types of bainite: upper bainite formed by cooling from austenite into
the temperature range of 300 oC to 500 oC, and lower bainite which forms by cooling to
the temperature range of 200 oC to 300 oC. The general definition of bainite is that the
microstructure consists of a non-lamellar mixture of ferrite and carbides. More
specifically, upper bainite consists of lath or plate shaped ferrite arranged in packets
separated by layers of cementite particles (Figure 1). Lower bainite consists of fine
needlelike plates or laths with the carbides precipitated within the laths. The reason for
this differentiation is that there are clear differences between the mechanical properties of
upper and lower bainite. Any refinement of microstructure in low alloy steels normally
leads to an increase in the properties, particularly the strength, hence making lower
bainite the more attractive microstructure.

Figure 1: Schematic representation of upper and lower bainite [8].

The kinetics of bainite formation vary with alloy content. Depending on the alloy content,
cooling rates in the range ~ 1-100 oC/s can allow the formation of bainitic
microstructures. There has been a recent trend in PM alloys to utilize alloying elements
that provide enhanced hardenability: examples are chromium, manganese, silicon and
vanadium [9-11]. The higher sintering temperatures allow for the reduction of oxides
from these elements in atmospheres that are predominately nitrogen with small amounts
of hydrogen (90 v/o nitrogen / 10 v/o hydrogen). The effect on these alloy elements on
the formation of bainite is shown in continuous cooling transformation diagrams, Figure
2. Figure 2(a) shows a plain carbon steel (~ 0.40 w/o C) with only additions of
manganese (~0.70 w/o). It can be seen that cooling rates in the range of 100 oC/s are
necessary to form bainite in this alloy composition. This cooling rate is also not
achievable with current sinter hardening furnaces. However if alloying elements of
(chromium, molybdenum and vanadium) are added to the same steel (addition levels of
1.19, 0.50 and 0.22 w/o respectively), the cooling rate necessary to achieve bainite during
continuous cooling is reduced. In this alloy, cooling rates typically found in sintering
furnaces with accelerated cooling (0.7 to 3 oC/s), are sufficient to form bainite. If the
cooling rate is sufficiently high, predominately lower bainite will form.

(a) (b)
Figure 2: CCT curves for (a) a plain carbon steel and (b) steel with similar composition
to (a) but with the additions of chromium, molybdenum and vanadium [12].

Figure 3 shows the properties of some novel bainitic steels in comparison with some high
performing steels such as martensitic, high strength low alloy, dual phase and
conventional mild steels. It can be seen that this new class of bainitic steels exhibit
exceedingly high strength levels while retaining ductility exceeding those of martensitic
steels. In general, bainitic steels are ideal for applications requiring strengths under 1000
MPa, where the total alloy concentration is kept below 2 w/o [8]. However, the design of
the alloy must be considered along with the thermal treatment to obtain the correct
microstructures. PM steels with adequate hardenability must be designed, especially
considering the lower cooling rates currently available in PM compared with wrought
alloys.
 Figure 3: Comparison of yield strength and elongation for high performing versus new
class of banitic steels (wrought alloys) [2].

The objective of the present study was to develop an alloy that, utilizing accelerated
cooling in the sintering process, would contain large amounts of lower bainite. And
further to evaluate the mechanical properties of this mixed microstructure in relation to
upper bainite and fully martensitic microstructures.

ALLOY PREPARATION AND TESTING

Mixtures of the base powder and a master alloy containing silicon were utilized to
prepare test specimens. The base powder was an alloy pre-alloyed with chromium,
manganese, molybdenum and vanadium. The master alloy was 75 w/o ferro-silicon with
a mean particle size (d50) of approximately 10 µm.

The powders were mixed with Acrawax C lubricant and graphite. Graphite additions
were 0.60 w/o (unless otherwise noted) resulting in a sintered carbon level of
approximately 0.50 w/o. Samples for transverse rupture (TR), impact testing and tensile
testing were compacted uniaxially at a pressure of 690 MPa. The test pieces were
sintered in a high temperature Abbott continuous-belt furnace at 1260 °C (2300 °F) for
30 min in an atmosphere of 90 v/o nitrogen / 10 v/o hydrogen. Accelerated cooling
experiments were conducted using the same furnace but utilizing a gas quench to provide
accelerated cooling at a rates ranging from 0.7 to 2.4 oC/s. Test pieces were tempered at
temperatures from 204 oC (400 oF) to 760 oC (1400 oF) for 1 h in 100 v/o nitrogen.

For heat treatment, samples were austenitized at 900 °C (1650 °F) for 60 min at
temperature in a 75 v/o nitrogen / 25 v/o hydrogen atmosphere prior to quenching in oil.
Prior to mechanical testing, green and sintered densities, dimensional change (DC), and
apparent hardness were determined on the tensile and TR samples. Five tensile
specimens and five TR specimens were evaluated for each composition. The densities of
the green and sintered steels were determined in accordance with MPIF Standard 42.
Tensile testing followed MPIF Standard 10 and apparent hardness measurements were
made on the tensile and TR specimens, in accordance with MPIF Standard 43.

Green density of the base powder was measured with a 12.7 mm diameter die at a height
of 12.7 mm at a compaction pressure of 400 MPa with 1% ZnSt.

The apparent density and flow rate of the base powder were determined in accordance
with MPIF Standards 3 and 4, and the sieve analysis in accordance with MPIF Standard
5.

Specimens for microstructural characterization were prepared using standard

metallographic procedures. Subsequently, they were examined using light optical and
scanning electron microscopy in the polished and etched conditions. Light optical
microscopy was used to examine the microstructures in the etched (2 v/o nital / 4 w/o
picral) condition using multiple magnifications. Quantitative analysis using a manual
point count on etched specimens (1 v/o nital / 4 w/o picral) was performed at 1000x to
estimate the proportions of transformation products. Multiple fields were sampled on
each prepared cross-section using an x-y grid containing 165 equally spaced points.
Additionally, microindentation hardness measurements were performed on lightly etched
(2 v/o nital / 4 w/o picral) specimens.

The scanning electron microscope was used to image both the etched microstructures and
fracture surfaces from impact tested specimens.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Alloy System

The chemical composition of the alloy system was chosen primarily to minimize cost and
to have enough alloying content to ensure that a bainitic microstructure could be formed
utilizing a conventional sinter-hardening furnace. Based on previous work by the authors
[13] it was determined that elements such as chromium, manganese and silicon can have
a synergy with molybdenum and lead to a hardenable alloy at a reasonable cost.
Molybdenum is known to enhance bainite formation while retarding the formation of
pearlite/ferrite so it was chosen as the base element from which to build the alloy. The
addition of vanadium also increases the hardenability of low alloy steels and has the
advantage that it combines with nitrogen from the sintering atmosphere to form vanadium
nitride precipitates which limit the austenite grain size during sintering leading to a finer
microstructure upon cooling. It has also been found that both silicon and vanadium
suppress the formation of carbides which favors the formation of bainite. Chromium,
molybdenum, silicon and vanadium are strong carbide forming elements and undergo
secondary hardening during tempering at high temperatures. This hardening occurs when
fine alloy carbides form at the expense of the cementite and generally occurs at
temperature ranges from 500 to 600 oC. This secondary hardening (or age-hardening)
often results in strength levels in excess of what could be achieved in as-quenched
martensite.

Table I: Chemical Composition and Physical Properties of Experimental Alloy.

C S O N Si Cr Mn Mo V
(w/o) (w/o) (w/o) (w/o) (w/o) (w/o) (w/o) (w/o) (w/o)
0.010 0.010 0.250 0.020 0.75 0.58 0.40 0.89 0.10

+80 +100 +140 +200 +230 +325 Pan AD Flow GD

3 3
(w/o) (w/o) (w/o) (w/o) (w/o) (w/o) (w/o) (g/cm ) (secs) (g/cm )
0.2 3.5 14.8 21.6 12.0 18.8 29.1 2.93 27.3 6.54

The powder was produced by conventional water atomization followed by annealing in

100 v/o hydrogen at 1000 oC. The sieve analysis, apparent density and green density of
the base powder (Table I) are typical of base powders commonly used in the PM
industry. Silicon was added to the powder via a master alloy and graphite was utilized
for the carbon addition. All other elements were pre-alloyed into the powder prior to
atomization. Carbon additions were limited to ranges of 0.40 to 0.60 w/o in preliminary
studies to achieve a significant amount of bainite in the microstructure. Above this range,
the carbon can lead to coarse cementite particles that act as initiation sites for fracture.
For the data presented here, graphite additions of 0.60 w/o were determined to be
optimum.

Sintering Response

Initial sintering studies were needed to generate a series of microstructures containing

different levels of bainite for testing. An Abbott high temperature belt furnace was
utilized and a sintering temperature of 1260 oC (2300 oF) was utilized in an attempt to get
as much of the silicon master alloy in solution as possible. A mixture of 90 v/o nitrogen
and 10 v/o hydrogen was used for the sintering atmosphere. The furnace was equipped
with a “Varicool Unit” that allowed nitrogen gas to cool the test specimens as they
entered the cooling zone of the furnace. The variable speed blower allows different rates
of convective cooling to be achieved. Previous measurements on this furnace showed
cooling rates from 0.7 oC/s to 2.4 oC/s.
 (a) No Cool (b) CR1 (c) CR2

(d) CR 3 (e) CR 4 (f) HT

Figure 3: Microstructures of experimental alloy with various cooling rates ((a)-(e)) and
austenitized and oil quenched (f).

Figure 3 shows the microstructure from the tensile specimens sintered at 1260 oC (2300
o
F) and cooled at various rates. Figure 3(a) is the microstructure with only furnace
cooling; i.e. no accelerated cooling utilized. The microstructure is predominantly upper
bainite with plates of ferrite about 10 µm long and less than 1 µm thick. As when the
accelerated cooling is utilized at a very low rate the microstructure is still upper bainite
but it is finer and is difficult to resolve the individual subunits. There is a small amount of
martensite in highly allowed areas, most likely due to insufficient diffusion time for full
homogenization. Increasing the accelerated cooling further (CR2), the microstructure
becomes predominately bainite (77%) with significantly less ferrite. However at this
cooling rate, significant amounts of martensite are formed resulting in a mixed
microstructure. As the cooling rate is further increased (CR3 to CR4), the amount of
lower bainite decreases and the amount of martensite increased and the ferrite vanished.
Figure 3(f) shows the same alloy austenitized at 900 oC and oil quenched. This
microstructure consists of 100 v/o martensite and will be used as a benchmark for
comparison of the mechanical properties of the bainitic-containing alloys. A summary of
the microstructures of the six samples, as shown in Figure 3, is detailed in Table II.

Table II: Summary of Microstructural Constituents of Specimens (a) to (f) in Figure 3

(values are volume percent).

Process  
Lower  Bainite Martensite Upper  Bainite
Condition
As  Sintered   Some  small  amounts  i n  Alloyed  
0 ~100
(No  Cool) Regions
Cooling  Rate  1   Some  small  amounts  i n  Alloyed  
0 ~100
(CR1) Regions
Cooling  Rate  2  
77 22 1
(CR2)
Cooling  Rate  3  
41 58 1
(CR3)
Cooling  Rate  4  
3 96 1
(CR4)
Heat  Treated  
0 100 0
(HT)

Mechanical Properties

Although a microstructure consisting of 100% lower bainite was not achieved utilizing
the processing and alloying parameters used in this study, it has been found that a mixed
microstructure (bainite and martensite) can provide an ideal combination of properties.
Due to the absence of coarse eutectoid carbides, the steel has a high resistance to
cleavage fracture and void formation. This leads to a concurrent increase in strength and
toughness. Tensile test results of the alloys cited in Table II are shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4 show the properties of the same alloy ranging from one of upper bainite with
extensive ferrite to first one of mainly lower bainite and finally to fully martensitic
(austenitizing and oil quenching). The as sintered material which consists of nearly 100
percent upper bainite has the lowest ultimate tensile strength and hardness. Upper bainite
forms at relatively high temperatures (just below the range for pearlite formation) with
lower hardness values than lower bainite or martensite. Upper bainite forms in blocky
patches containing plates of ferrite with relatively coarse particles of cementite between
the ferrite blocks. The microindentation hardness of the mixed upper bainite and ferrite
(Figure 3(a)) was measured to be 335 HV100gf as compared with 750 HV50gf for the all
martensitic structure. This relatively soft and coarse microstructure leads to lower
strength and hardness. The same situation exits in the sample utilizing cooling rate CR1.
Although the microstructure of this material is still upper bainite, the microstructure is
visibly finer than in the material with accelerated cooling (Figure 3(a) versus Figure 3(b))
and this leads to an increase in strength and hardness. As the cooling rate is increased
further (CR2 and CR3), lower bainite starts to form along with a significant percentage of
martensite. At the highest cooling rate utilized in the study (CR4), the microstructure
becomes predominately martensitic. As a reference point, a heat treated sample was
included in the study to provide a fully

o
o
Tempering Temperature ( C)
Tempering Temperature ( C)
260 538
260 538 160 1103
180 1241
HT

Ultimate Tensile Strength (MPa)

Ultimate Tensile Strength (ksi)

HT 140 965
160 1103

Yield Strength (MPa)

Yield Strength (ksi)
CR4 CR3

CR3
120 CR4 827
140 CR2 965
CR2

100 689
120 827 CR1

CR1

100 689 80 551

No Cool No Cool

80 551 60 413
0 500 1000 1500 0 500 1000 1500
o o
Tempering Temperature ( F) Tempering Temperature ( F)
(a) (b)

o o
Tempering Temperature ( C) Tempering Temperature ( C)
260 538 260 538
5 70
HT

CR4
4 65
Apparent Hardness (HRA)

CR3

CR2
Elongation (%)

3 60
No Cool

CR2 CR1 CR1

2 CR4 55
CR3

1 50
No Cool
HT

0 45
0 500 1000 1500 0 500 1000 1500
o o
Tempering Temperature ( F) Tempering Temperature ( F)
(c) (d)

Figure 4: Tensile properties and apparent hardness of alloys shown in Figure 3. Final
sintered density 6.95 g/cm3.

martensitic structure for comparison of strength and hardness. The samples which contain
a significant amount of lower bainite have ultimate tensile strengths significantly higher
than those of the same alloy with upper bainite (~ 1000 MPa versus 655 MPa). Lower
bainite forms at much lower temperatures than upper bainite and develops a plate-like
morphology of ferrite. Also the carbides are extremely fine particles located within the
plates and are not usually discernable by optical microscopy. Figure 5 shows scanning
electron micrographs (SEM) of samples with upper bainite (no accelerated cooling) and
lower bainite (CR2). The ferrite in lower bainite meets at angles to each other making the
structure look needlelike, similar to martensite. Figure 5 shows the upper and lower
bainite structures SEM. Even at magnifications ~ 10,000 times it is still difficult to
distinguish the individual laths in the lower bainite. It is also evident from Figure 5 that
the refined microstructure in the lower bainite sample is the reason for the higher strength
of this material.

(a) (b)

Figure 5: SEM images of: (a) alloy with no cooling- upper bainite and (b) cooling rate
(CR2)- lower bainite.

The other significant finding (when looking at the ultimate tensile strength) is that the
mixed microstructure (CR2 and CR3) performs nearly the same as the fully martensitic
steel that is austenitized and oil quenched. Although the heat treated material has higher
ultimate strength as quenched, the material cannot be used in this condition as it is
extremely brittle and is prone to quench cracking. When the three materials are tempered
at temperatures ranging from 204 to 316 oC (400 to 600 oF), the mixed microstructures of
lower bainite and martensite exhibit nearly the same ultimate tensile strength as those of
the fully martensitic structures. It has been found that in dual phase materials the
mechanical properties are affected by the size, shape and distribution of the second phase,
in this case bainite [14-17]. The work of these authors suggests that the lower bainite
forming in large volumes, and being fine in nature, actually refines the martensite grain
size in the alloy. This finer grain size leads to higher strength. The other advantage of the
mixed microstructure with high bainite levels is that it achieves this strength level with a
much higher elongation than the martensitic steel (2.2% versus 1.0%).

Another interesting feature of the bainite/martensite mixed microstructure is that, at a

tempering temperature of 316 oC (600 oF) the material has the same ultimate tensile
strength as the fully martensitic (heat treated) structure but much higher toughness.
Figure 6 shows that the mixed microstructure has improved impact energy over the fully
martensitic alloy over a range of tempering temperatures. It has been shown that wrought
alloys with a mixed microstructure have higher impact values at both low and high
temperatures than the fully martensitic structure [18]. These studies showed that since the
lower bainite had a fine microstructure the energy to propagate a crack is similar to that
in a fully martensitic structure, but the energy to initiate a crack was much lower in the
mixed microstructure due to the softer lower bainite. This appears to be supported by the
data shown in Figure 6 as there is an improvement in toughness with the lower
bainite/martensite structure.

(a) (b)

o
Tempering Temperature ( C)

22 93 204 316 427 538

20 27
Impact Energy (Ft-lbs)

CR2
Impact Energy (J)

18 24

16 21

14 18
HT

12 16

10 13
0 200 400 600 800 1000
o
Tempering Temperature ( F)

(c)

Figure 6: Fracture surfaces of: (a) alloy utilizing cooling rate 2 (CR2), and (b) heat
treated sample, and (c) corresponding impact energy versus tempering temperature.
In evaluating the fracture surfaces of the tested impact bars, the bainitic sample (Figure
6a) is characterized by a combination of mostly dimples with frequent areas of cleavage
and quasi-cleavage. In comparison, the quenched and tempered sample, Figure 6b,
exhibited the dimpled surface with rarely encountered small areas showing cleavage.
These observations coincide with the findings of Barranco, et al. in their study of the
effects of tempering on martensitic and bainitic steels [18]. The presence of the smooth
pore surfaces was common to both samples and typical for tested porous PM compacts.

Economics of Lower Bainite

Although this work was an exploratory study on bainite, some comments are warranted in
relation to performance and cost of such an alloy in comparison with those of currently
available PM alloy systems. From the results, it is obvious that an alloy with a mixed
microstructure of lower bainite and martensite can provide attractive combinations of
strength and ductility. Table III compares the CR2 processed material to MPIF diffusion
alloy steels in the density range of 6.95 to 7.05 g/cm3. The cost savings are difficult to
quantify. However the use of accelerated cooling, in combination with proper alloy
design, can lead to a high performance material with lower alloy costs. In addition, these
alloys will not require a heat treatment, other than tempering and would eliminate oil in
the part. These cost savings can be balanced against the use of high temperature sintering.
The two MPIF alloys shown in Table III use combinations of copper, molybdenum, and
nickel in excess of 3 w/o while the CR2 material utilizes lower amounts of less expensive
alloy elements such as chromium, manganese and silicon. Although not the purpose of
this study, it would seem reasonable that an alloy could be designed to utilize low cost
alloying elements in combination with accelerated cooling to produce a lean alloy that
would approach the properties of a quench and tempered steel. Since the sintering
temperature of PM steels is above the austenitizing temperature it would seem logical
that an alloy with sufficient hardenability could be designed to utilize sintering
conventional sintering temperatures of around 1120 oC (2050 oF).

Table III. Comparison of Mechanical Properties of Experimental Alloy with MPIF Heat
Treated Grades (Density = 6.95-7.5 g/cm3).

Apparent Total
TRS TRS Impact Energy UTS 0.20% Offset Yield
Hardness Elongation
3 3 3
Material Designation Code (10 psi) (MPa) (J) (ft.lbf) (HRC) (10 psi) (MPa) (10 psi) (MPa) (%)
FD-0205-120HT 190 1307 9 7 33 115.0 791 D D <1
FD-0405-130HT 200 1376 9 7 35 140.0 963 D D <1
Experimental Alloy (CR2) 287 1975 22 16 23 148.0 1018 113.5 781 2.2
CONCLUSIONS

• The chemistry of a low alloy PM steel was designed successfully to give high
levels of lower bainite in a conventional sintering furnace utilizing accelerated
cooling.
• The tensile properties of this alloy, when tempered in the range of 200-315 oC
(400-600 oF) led to ultimate tensile strengths close to the heat treated properties of
the same alloy.
• The impact energy of the alloy with high levels of lower bainite was superior to
the same alloy with a heat treated martensitic structure.
• The use of accelerating cooling with proper alloy design, in some cases, may
eliminate the need for heat treating and therefore eliminate the oil on parts.
• The potential exists for alloys to be designed that can be sintered at conventional
temperatures (1120 oC (2050 oF) and still exhibit significant amounts of lower
bainite. This will lead to alloys with improved properties.
• The use of steels containing lower bainite should lead to leaner alloys systems,
thus lowering the overall cost.

REFERENCES

1. S. Sharma, S. Sangal and K. Mondal, “Development of New High-Strength Carbide-Free

Bainitic Seels”, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, Vol. 42A, 2011 pp.3921-3933.
2. C. Garcia-Mateo and F.G. Caballero, , “Ultra High Strength Bainitic Steels”, ISIJ
International, Vol. 45 No.11, 2005 pp.1736-1740,
3. H.K.D.H Bhadeshia,” High Performance Bainitic Steels,” Materials Science Forum,
500-501, 2005 pp.63-74.
4. F.G. Caballero, H.K.D.H Bhadeshia, K.J.A. Mawella, D.G. Jones and P. Brown,
“Design of Novel High Strength Bainitic Steels: Part 1,” Materials Science and
Technology, Vol. 17, 2001, pp. 512-516.
5. F.G. Caballero, H.K.D.H Bhadeshia, K.J.A. Mawella, D.G. Jones and P. Brown,
“Design of Novel High Strength Bainitic Steels: Part 2,” Materials Science and
Technology, Vol. 17, 2001, pp. 517-522.
6. F.G. Caballero and H.K.D.H Bhadeshia , “High-Strength Bainitic Steels,”
International Journal of ISSI, Vol.1, No.1 2004, pp. 15-23.
7. R. Bakhtiari and A. Ekrami, “The Effect of Bainite Morphology on the Mechanical
Properties of a High Bainite Dual (HBDP) Phase Steel,” Materials Science and
Engineering, Vol. 525, Issue 1-2, 2009 pp.159-165.
8. H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia and R.W.K. Honeycombe, Steels Microstructure and Properties,
Elsevier Publishing, Third Edition, 2006, p.143.
9. B. Lindsley, “High Performance Manganese Containing PM steels”, Advances in
Powder Metallurgy& Particulate Materials, compiled by R. Lawcock, A. Lawley and
P. J. McGeehan, Metal Powder Industries Federation, Princeton, NJ, 2008, part 7, pp.
17-25.
10. J. Tengzelius, S. Grek, and C. Blande, , “Limitations and Possibilities in the
Utilization of Cr and Mn as Alloying Elements in High Strength Sintered Steels”,
Modern Developments in Powder Metallurgy, vol. 13, Edited by H. Hausner, H.
Antes and G. Smith, MPIF, Princeton, NJ, 1980 p. 159.
11. C. Schade, T. Murphy, A. Lawley, and Roger Doherty,” Microstructure and
Mechanical Properties of Microalloyed PM Steels,” International Journal of Powder
Metallurgy, 2012, vol. 48, no. 3, pp.51-59.
12. M. Atkins, “Atlas of Continuous Cooling Transformation Diagrams for Engineering
Steels,” American Society of Metals , 1980, Metals Park, Ohio.
13. C. Schade, T. Murphy, A. Lawley, and Roger Doherty,” The Influnce of Silicon on the
Mechanical Properties and Hardenability of PM Steels,” Advances in Powder Metallurgy and
Particulate Materials, 2013, compiled by A.Lawley. P. McGeehan and R. Lawcock, MPIF,
NJ, vol. 7, pp. 1-10.
14. A.K.Jena and C. Chaturvedi, “ On the Effect of the Volume Fraction of Martensite on
the Tensile Strength of Dual-phase Steel,” Materials Science and Engineering, 1988,
Vol. 100, No.1-2, pp.1-6.
15. A. Bag, K.K, Ray and E.S. Dwarakadasa, “Influence of Martensite Content and
Morphology on Tensile and Impact Properties of High-Martensite Dual Phase
Steels,” Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A, 1999 vol. 30A, pp. 1193 –1202.
16. Y. Tomita and K. Okabayashi, “Improvement in Lower Temperature Mechanical
Properties of 0.40 C-Ni-Cr-Mo Ultra High Strength Steel with the Second Phase
Lower Bainite,” Metall. Trans. A, 1983; vol. 14A: pp. 485-492.
17. Y.. Tomita and K. Okabayashi, “Mechanical Properties of 0.40 C-Ni-Cr-Mo Ultra
High Strength Steel Having a Mixed Structure of Bainite and Martensite,” Metall.
Trans. A, 1985; vol. 16A: pp. 73-82.
18. J.M. Barranco, P.J. Cote and J.A. Kapp, “Tempering Effects for Lower Bainite,
Martensite and Mixed Microstructures on Impact, Fracture and Related Mechanical
Properties of ASTM A723 Steel,” Technical Report ARCCB-TR-92024, June 1992,
Benet Laboratories, Watervliet, N.Y.