1. Introduction
Gears and gearboxes are used for a wide range of applications. For example, high power wind turbines usually have a gearbox transforming the low speed rotor shaft rotation into the higher rotational speed required by the generator. Approximately 85 percent of today’s windmills are equipped with a gearbox. Usually, such gearboxes are designed as one- or two-stage planetary transmissions. These gearboxes have been gradually increasing in size over recent years due to the up-scaling of individual turbine sizes. In combination with this performance growth, the economic and qualitative optimizations of the entire manufacturing chain are of high importance. The gears in wind turbines are sometimes exposed to extremely high loads at the gear flanks and in the tooth root of the gear teeth, for example during sudden changes of wind speed or hard stops. Many failures and breakdowns of wind turbines, accordingly, originated in the gearbox, leading to significant outages and replacement costs. The powertrain of a windmill accounts for approximately 25 percent of the total equipment cost. In the mining industry, gears and gearboxes can be found in a variety of different applications along the entire process chain such as conveyor drives for extraction, gearboxes for mill drive systems in the processing stage or gearboxes for the stacker reclaimer and special trucks for the transportation process. Most of the gears in these applications also have to transmit high torque, are often subjected to demanding operating conditions and have to achieve long service life. Consequently, large-sized gears can be found in many of these products.
The general requirements for high performance gear components are a hard case providing adequate fatigue strength, as well as wear resistance and a tough core preventing brittle failure under high impact loads [
1]. Accordingly, various alloy concepts, thermo-mechanical and thermo-chemical treatments have been developed to achieve this property combination. Commonly, gears are therefore case carburized. The heat treatment process of case carburizing is complex, requiring a high level of technical knowledge, as well as a profound understanding of the material characteristics. Alloy concepts for medium- and large-sized gear applications significantly vary in different markets due to historical drivers (e.g., automotive, machine building, military), practical experiences, as well as the local preference for certain alloying elements (
Table 1).
Carburizing steels must comply with the following key requirements with regard to component properties and durability:
Chemical composition/hardenability;
Homogeneity/microscopic and macroscopic cleanness;
Mechanical properties (tensile strength, fatigue strength and toughness);
Wear resistance, contact fatigue strength, bending strength and vibration resistance;
High and uniform dimensional stability [
2].
DIN EN 10084 and ISO 683-11 [
3,
4] specify the technical delivery conditions for carburizing steel grades. Besides the classification and designation of the steel grades, also the production processes, requirements (e.g., hardenability ranges), as well as the testing and inspection procedures are specified. In addition to these general standards, many end users have issued proprietary delivery specifications, which describe particular demands (e.g., austenite grain size) in more detail. This is a result of the many possible processing routes for the production of carburized components. Depending on the component requirements, different sequences of annealing, hardening and machining are pursued (
Figure 1). For instance, when a high dimensional stability of the component is needed, pre-hardening is performed before and stress relieving after machining. It is hence essential to take the entire process chain into consideration when optimizing the material. For the design of large-scale gearboxes, steel grades are commonly selected according to the requirements specified in DIN 3990/ISO 6336, Part 5 [
5,
6].
Figure 2 indicates as an example the anticipated tooth root endurance strength of various steel alloys and heat treatment concepts. Within the strength fields, in general, three quality levels—ML, MQ, ME acc. to [
5,
6]—can be distinguished: grade ML stands for the minimum requirement; grade MQ represents requirements that can be met by experienced manufacturers at moderate cost; grade ME represents requirements that must be aimed at when higher allowable stresses are desirable (
Figure 2). It is obvious that the highest strength values are achievable for case carburized gears of quality grade ME. The diagram relates an easily measurable property like, in this case, surface hardness to a complex system property such as the tooth root endurance strength. The fact that for a given surface hardness, a rather wide range of tooth root endurance strength levels can be obtained suggests that alloy composition, microstructure and thermo-chemical treatment have an extremely high impact on the actual gear performance. Another system property of high importance for gear durability is the resistance to gear flank failures like pitting, micropitting, as well as tooth flank fracture. High contact pressure, the status of lubrication, material properties, microstructure and chemical composition influence these system properties. Furthermore, with respect to the flank load carrying capacity, case carburized materials of the highest quality level ME typically show the highest achievable strength values.
For both vehicle and industrial transmissions, further optimization of gear steel towards better performance under demanding conditions is necessary. This is amongst others motivated by reducing fuel consumption and emissions, as well as a higher load bearing capacity at the surface, in the near surface case, as well as at greater depths below the surface. A secondary target is to design efficient alloying concepts taking the entire processing route into consideration including modified or innovative heat treatments. A fundamental way of dealing with these demands is to adjust the chemical composition of carburizing steels. In this respect, one can principally define two approaches. An economically-driven approach aims at achieving a defined performance spectrum with a cost-reduced alloy concept, whereas a performance-driven approach targets superior properties at equal or moderately increased cost. The current work considers both approaches focusing on modified molybdenum-based alloy concepts including niobium microalloying. Thereby, innovative heat treatment conditions have also been considered. The success of either strategy is verified by using standardized tooth root fatigue tests and back-to-back running tests allowing direct benchmarking against a database of many established gear steel grades.
3. Controlling Grain Size in Carburizing Steels
Many studies have been indicating that prior austenite grain size control in carburizing steel can be effectively achieved by using niobium microalloying in combination with other microalloys such as titanium, aluminum and nitrogen [
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
18,
19,
20]. The developed concepts have been used to generally refine and homogenize the grain size under standard case carburizing conditions. Furthermore, it has been demonstrated that high temperature carburizing becomes possible without violating grain size restrictions, thus allowing a faster furnace throughput. This is particularly beneficial when a larger case depth is required like in gears for trucks and heavy machinery. Additionally, a production concept for fine-grained carburizing steel has been developed based on an aluminum-free melt. This is to fully eliminate brittle inclusions deteriorating toughness and fatigue resistance in the steel.
The obstruction of grain coarsening is based on a pinning effect of precipitates on the austenite grain boundary. For efficient grain boundary pinning, a suitable size and distribution of precipitates is necessary, which again depends on the prior thermo-chemical treatment, as well as the carburizing temperature. Above a certain limiting carburizing temperature, the precipitates coarsen or dissolve, and their pinning effect is lost. It appears to be most efficient keeping as much as possible microalloy content in solid solution during thermo-chemical processing, which then can precipitate as fine-sized and homogeneously-distributed particles during up-heating to carburizing temperature. Niobium has the beneficial characteristic of low solubility in such steel, similar to titanium, providing temperature-stable precipitates. Yet, niobium has a lower affinity to nitrogen and does not form coarse nitrides, contrary to titanium. Furthermore, its precipitation kinetics is slower so that niobium remains longer in solution, forming finer and more dispersed precipitates. It was also found that mixed precipitates of Nb, Ti and N are better resistant against dissolution at a very high austenitizing temperature. Therefore, a microalloy combination of low Ti (sub-stoichiometric to N) and Nb in the range of 0.03–0.10% has been proven to be most efficient.
Adding niobium in combination with titanium to the reference grade 18CrNiMo7-6 has a marked effect on the grain size distribution as shown in
Figure 10a. Not only the grain size is generally much finer, but also the scattering range becomes narrower. The microalloyed variant safely avoids prohibited grain sizes despite high carburizing temperature (1030 °C) and the long holding time (25 h). Similar good results of grain size stability have been obtained with modified variants of 25MoCr4 and 20CrMo5 grades (
Figure 10b). The Nb and Ti dual microalloyed 25MoCr4 variant reveals resistance to coarsening up to a 1050 °C carburizing temperature, whereas the Nb-only microalloyed 20CrMo5 variant is stable up to 1000 °C. The latter alloy indicates that for very high carburizing temperatures, indeed, the addition of multiple microalloys appears to increase the temperature stability of pinning precipitates. However, at standard carburizing conditions below 1000 °C, also the Nb-only microalloyed concept exhibits very fine austenite grain size with a rather narrow size distribution.
The martensite start temperature depends on the austenite grain size [
21]. The smaller the austenite grain size, the lower is the martensite start temperature. Accordingly, in a mixed grain size structure, transformation locally occurs at different temperatures. This situation will lead to the generation of residual stresses due to the volume change when the microstructure transforms from austenite to martensite. The earlier formed martensite islands cannot plastically accommodate the transformational volume change of the later formed martensite islands. Hence, imbalanced elastic stresses cause a macroscopic distortion of the quenched component. It has been experimentally confirmed that a larger grain size scatter results in a larger scatter of distortion (
Figure 11a) [
22]. The distortion has to be corrected by straightening or hard machining. This is not only costly, but also reduces the thickness of the case layer when performing hard machining. Furthermore, residual stresses overlay the applied load stresses. Especially tensile residual stresses can cause premature failure, for instance under fatigue conditions.
Consequently, microalloying of case carburizing steel leading to reduced grain size scatter as demonstrated above is expected to lower quench distortions. This could indeed be verified for components manufactured from the modified variant of 25MoCr4 (320 ppm Nb, pm Ti, 160 ppm N) shown in
Figure 11b. The material was continuously cast into bar. The bar was FP (ferrite-pearlite) annealed before cold extrusion and then again FP annealed. Carburization occurred at 980 °C for 195 min to a target case depth of 0.95 mm with a total furnace residence of 400 min. The components were then quenched in an oil bath (Isorapid 277) held at 60 °C. Subsequently part distortion was characterized by roundness deviation measurements at five positions as shown in
Figure 11b. It is obvious that the microalloyed variant has a much lower roundness deviation as compared to the standard alloy. At each measuring position, the deviation was reduced by approximately 50% resulting in a similar reduction of straightening efforts. The cost savings achieved by such reduced straightening or hard machining efforts likely compensate the cost for the microalloys. If the available equipment allows high temperature carburizing, severe process time savings can be realized. For instance, for producing a target case depth of 1.5 mm, the total treatment cycle time can be reduced by 25 and 40 percent when the carburizing temperature is raised to 980 °C and 1030 °C, respectively, as compared to a standard carburizing temperature of 930 °C.
4. Increasing Hardenability and Tempering Resistance
As outlined above, it is of high interest to avoid a steep hardness gradient in the transition zone from the case layer to the core material. Therefore, the hardenability of the alloy must be improved. Several alloying elements, besides carbon, contribute to hardenability, such as: molybdenum, manganese, chromium, nickel, as well as boron microalloying. For cost reduction reasons for the alloys, the use of higher manganese and chromium additions, eventually combined with boron microalloying, has been favored for many gear applications. However, such a cost-reduced alloy concepts, although providing good hardenability, have limitations in terms of toughness and tempering resistance. Besides, the limitation of intergranular oxidation requires reduced Mn, Cr and also Si levels. In the other extreme, alloy producers have developed richly-alloyed steels for those applications where transmission failure causes high replacement and outage costs.
An example is 15NiMoCr10-4 (C: 0.15%, Si: 1.1%, Cr: 1%, Mo: 2% and Ni: 2.5%), which is used in high-end applications, e.g., in aerospace or Formula-1 gears. However, such steel requires special melting technology and is, thus, not widely available. Comparing this steel to another high-Ni steel (14NiCrMo13-4), the increase of the molybdenum content from 0.25%–2.0% brings about a significant improvement of hardenability, surface hardness and also tempering resistance [
23] (
Figure 12a). The high tempering resistance of the material bears two important advantages. Firstly, it allows performing duplex treatments, i.e., the case-hardened surface is exposed to a second treatment, such as PVD coating or plasma nitriding (PN), for further increasing surface hardness. These treatments are usually performed in a temperature window of 300 °C to 500 °C. It is thus a prerequisite that the hardness obtained in the underlying material after quenching from the carburizing temperature not be degraded by the second heat cycle. Secondly, many conventional case carburizing steel grades are restricted to a maximum operating temperature of 120 °C to 160 °C. A steel grade with high tempering resistance can be operated at higher temperatures without degrading. Elevated operating temperatures may occur for instance by frictional heating when the transmission experiences lubrication problems.
Good tempering resistance in a typical gear steel base alloy can also be achieved with lower molybdenum additions, as indicated in
Figure 12b. Already, a Mo addition of 0.5% to 0.7% provides good resistance against softening for tempering parameters up to around 16. Resistance against softening under a tempering parameter of 16 means that a secondary treatment at a temperature of 450 °C for up to 10 h should be sustainable. This condition is typical for plasma nitriding.
Microalloying of Nb further enhances the tempering resistance, obviously as the result of a synergy effect with Mo. Molybdenum and niobium have to some extent similar metallurgical effects. Both exert strong solute drag on grain boundaries, as well as dislocations [
24] and also lower the activity of carbon [
25]. These fundamental effects are noticed by delayed recovery or recrystallization, as well as a reduced rate of pearlite growth, thus increased hardenability. The solubility of both elements in austenite is however very different. Molybdenum has a good solubility [
26], whereas that of niobium is low [
27]. Therefore, niobium precipitates as NbC particles at rather high temperatures. Manganese, chromium and particularly molybdenum increase the solubility of niobium in austenite [
28]. Accordingly, more niobium will remain in solution after quenching from austenitizing temperature, which is then available for fine precipitation during tempering treatment acting against softening.
5. Modification and Testing of Carburizing Steels
Based on the individual and synergetic effects of alloying elements described before, the intended processing route and the desired property profile, two modified alloy concepts have been designed (
Table 2) for a full-scale production trial including gear running tests. One of the developed alloy designs (Concept V1) can be considered as a modified 20MnCr5 grade. It is targeting higher performance than that of 18CrNiMo7-6 at similar alloy cost. The content of carbon is increased for higher maximum hardness while Mo and Ni are added for increased hardenability and tempering resistance. The other developed alloy design (Concept V2) can be considered as modified 20CrMo5 grade added with nickel, which has a lower total alloy cost than 18CrNiMo7-6, yet aiming at similar performance. In both concepts, niobium microalloying is applied for austenite grain size control. The achieved mechanical properties of both developed case carburizing steels obtained after heat treatment indeed correspond to the postulated expectations (
Figure 10 and
Table 3). The hardenability behavior of Concept V1 is superior to that of 18CrNiMo17-6, whereas that of Concept V2 is within the hardenability range of the reference grade. After an austenitizing treatment at 880 °C for a duration of 2 h followed by quenching in oil and holding at 180 °C for 2 h, Concept V1 shows clearly better tensile and fatigue strength, while Concept V2 nearly exactly matches the strength of the reference grade. The toughness of both developed steels is lower than that of 18CrNiMo7-6 due to the reduced nickel alloy content, yet remains still at a good level.
The heat treatment behavior of the developed alloys has been tested by a carburizing process operated at 1030 °C to a nominal case depth range of 0.95 mm to 1.2 mm. This originated from the gear running tests to be executed with a module of 5-mm gears actually requiring a 0.75 mm to 1.0 mm case depth. The additional case depth was intended to compensate for grinding losses during hard machining of the carburized gear. For determining the depth of the case layer, a limit hardness of 550 HV was defined according to ISO 6336-5. The targeted surface hardness was set to 680 HV–700 HV. Additionally, a secondary plasma nitriding treatment has been also performed at 400 °C and 440 °C, respectively.
Table 4 summarizes the hardness data for the various pilot heat treatments. In the as-quenched condition after carburizing, both grades fulfill the requirements. Both alloy concepts sustain a tempering treatment at 200 °C. Concept V2 however does not retain sufficient hardness after plasma nitriding treatment. On the contrary, Concept V1, due to its increased tempering resistance, shows very high surface hardness of around 1000 HV after plasma nitriding, whereas the core hardness is reduced. Nevertheless, a core hardness of more than 400 HV still represents a high value. It thus appears that Concept V1 by some further optimization has the potential of fulfilling the case depth requirements at secondary treatment temperatures up to 440 °C. A further increase of the molybdenum content towards 0.7% (
Figure 9) and fine-tuning of the microalloy addition are thought to be the most promising ways to achieve the necessary tempering resistance.
The operational performance of the developed steel grades (V1 and V2) was tested and benchmarked at FZG, Technical University of Munich, Germany. The tooth root load carrying capacity was investigated in a pulsator rig (
Figure 13a). Investigations on the flank load carrying capacity were performed by running tests on a back-to-back gear test rig (
Figure 13b) according to DIN ISO 14635-1 [
29]. The test gears for these investigations were case hardened after the gear milling. Subsequent to case carburizing, the test gears were mechanically cleaned by shot blasting. The flanks, as well as the tooth roots of the test gears for the investigations on the tooth root bending strength were not ground. The gear flanks of the test gears for the gear running tests were finally ground to a gear quality of
Q ≤ 5 and a surface roughness
Ra ≤ 0.3 µm. In order to reduce the effects of the premature contact profile, modifications in the form of tip relief were applied to the gears for the running tests.
For the experimental investigations on the tooth root bending strength standard pulsator test, gears with a gear module mn = 5, number of teeth z = 24 mm and face width b = 30 mm were used. For the running tests, spur gears with a module mn = 5 mm, a gear ratio of 17/18 and a face width b = 14 mm were used. Both test gear types are typical for the examination of bending strength respectively pitting load capacity of case carburized gears and according to the specifications of ISO 6336 for reference test gears.
The tooth root load carrying capacity is one of the determining factors in gear design. Besides the strength of the material itself, the existing state of stress (load-induced stresses and residual stresses) significantly influences the tooth root load carrying capacity. The mechanical cleaning procedure by shot blasting as used in this test program introduces compressive stresses in the sub-surface zone and is beneficial to fatigue resistance (see also
Figure 14a) [
30]. The current tooth root bending fatigue tests were carried out under a constant pulsating load with a frequency of 90 Hz and continued until the limiting number of load cycles of 6 × 10
6 was reached or tooth root breakage occurred. Gear standards generally consider 3 × 10
6 as the beginning of the endurance range for bending strength. For each alloy concept, a complete S-N-curve was determined based on a number of approximately 25 test points. The endurance strength level of the S-N-curve was determined using the “stair-step-method” based on at least 10 data points for each alloy concept. The pulsating load at the endurance limit was estimated for a failure probability of 50 percent. The low-cycle fatigue part of the S-N curve was supported by around 10 valid tests for each variant. The conversion of the pulsating load into the resulting tooth root stress was done as described in DIN 3990 Part 3 [
5]. The allowable stress numbers for bending conditions σ
Flim and σ
FE given in DIN 3990/ISO 6336 [
5,
6] are valid for standard reference test gears at standard test conditions in a gear running test and a failure probability of one percent. Therefore, the test results from the pulsator tests were converted to these conditions according to the state-of-the-art as outlined in detail by Niemann and Winter [
31].
The results obtained from these tests are displayed in
Table 5. Case carburized alloy Concept V1 (20MnCr5 mod.) exhibits a clearly higher tooth root bending strength than the case carburized alloy Concept V2 (20CrMo5 mod.), as can be expected from the hardness characteristics. It has been established that surface-hardened gears of high load capacity containing high residual compressive stresses in the surface layer due to shot peening exhibit an increased risk of crack initiation below the surface [
32]. In this respect, the cleanness of the material has a decisive influence. Furthermore, it is assumed that the microstructure and especially the ductility of the surface layer are also relevant to the cracking behavior. Alloy Concept V1 did not show sub-surface crack initiation, which may be related to sufficiently high cleanness and ductility.
Figure 14a compares the determined allowable stress numbers to the tooth root bending stress levels according to DIN 3990/ISO 6336 [
5,
6] and to the test results of several batches of two case hardened Western European standard steels determined under comparable test conditions [
33]. A further performance benchmark of both developed concepts against established case carburizing alloys is shown in
Figure 14b. In this diagram, the grey shaded area indicates the typical performance range of European state-of-the-art carburizing grades (see also
Figure 14a). Additionally, some international carburizing grades that were tested by the same method are indicated.
Figure 14 clearly demonstrates that alloy Concept V1 ranks on top of quality level ME defined for established alloys according to DIN 3990 [
5] and performs better than many higher alloyed steel grades including the reference grade 18CrNiMo7-6. Alloy Concept V2 compares well to the state-of-the-art alloys achieving quality level MQ.
In order to determine the pitting load capacity of the gear flank, repeated gear running tests were carried out for finding the endurance limit [
33]. The endurance limit for pitting strength is considered to be reached when at least 50 × 10
6 load cycles are sustained without damage (this criterion is generally accepted by gear standards). The test rig was driven with a constant speed of 3000 rpm. All test runs were performed under oil spray lubrication (approximately 2 L/min into the tooth mesh) with FVA (Forschungsvereinigung Antriebstechnik) Oil No. 3 with 4% additive Anglamol 99 (sulphur-phosphorous additive), a mineral oil of viscosity class ISO VG 100, and an oil temperature of 60 °C. Prior to each test run, a two-stage running-in period was performed.
Under the described test conditions, 6–8 test runs for each variant were scheduled at different load levels in order to determine the pitting load carrying capacity. The test runs were continued until either one of the failure criteria mentioned below was reached or the specified maximum number of load cycles was exceeded without failure. The test runs were regularly interrupted after a defined interval of load cycles in order to inspect the flank condition. According to the defined failure criteria, a test run was terminated when:
Tooth breakage occurred;
The flank area damaged by pitting exceeded about 4% of the working flank area of a single tooth or about 2% of the total working flank area;
The mean profile deviation due to micropitting exceeded the limiting value of 15 μm to 20 μm.
After every test run, the flank condition was evaluated and documented by means of digital photos (
Figure 15). During all test runs of alloy Concept V2, micropitting was observed on the flanks of the test pinion and test gear. However, the limiting criterion of a profile deviation
ffm > 20 μm due to micropitting was not reached in any of the test runs. Normally, light micropitting leads to higher load cycles until a pitting failure occurs. Test gears made from alloy Concept V1 partly showed a significantly lower sensitivity to micropitting than the test gears made from alloy Concept V2.
The performed gear running tests allow an approximate determination of the pinion torque at the endurance limit, as well as of the nominal contact stress number at the endurance for a failure probability of 50 percent. The allowable contact stress σ
Hlim representing the pitting load capacity with a failure probability of one percent is then calculated according to DIN 3990 [
5].
Table 6 summarizes the determined flank pitting load capacity limits for the two developed steel grades. A benchmark comparison of these data against the strength values for the different quality levels according to DIN 3990/ISO 6336, as well as for some reference data from the literature [
29] is provided by
Figure 16. A further performance benchmark of both developed concepts against established case carburizing alloys is shown in
Figure 17. Obviously, alloy Concept V1 (20MnCr5 mod.) exhibits a very high pitting endurance limit and outperforms established alloys of quality level ME. The pitting endurance limit of alloy Concept V2 (20CrMo5 mod.) is situated in the upper region of the established contact stress field for case hardened steels reaching quality level ME.
The current results suggest that alloy Concept V1 has the potential of providing an economically-viable solution for highly loaded gears in heavy machinery and vehicles. Its use in vehicle transmissions could enable downsizing of gear components, thereby reducing weight. In larger transmissions, such as those used in trucks and heavy machinery, its application can help with avoiding unexpected failure and extending warranty periods. The results of alloy Concept V2 indeed position it as a cost-attractive alternative to the established premium grade 18CrNiMo7-6.