IMPORTANCE OF INDUCTION

HARDENED CASE DEPTH IN

TORSIONAL APPLICATIONS
T
Induction hardened case his article updates work origi-
nally published in February
transformation causes it to expand
leaving the surface in compression, as
depth plays a very 1985 Metal Progress, which ex- opposed to through hardening where
amines the relationship be- the core also expends leaving the sur-
important part in tween induction hardened case depth face in tension.
determining the static and and torsional strength and fatigue life. The depth to which a shaft must be
This relationship is especially impor- hardened can be determined theoret-
fatigue properties of shafts. tant when designing shafts to transmit ically. Figure 1 shows two different in-
Both effective and total case torque, such as automotive and truck duction case depths (A and B) with a
axle shafts. The recent work also ex- surface hardness of 52 HRC and a core
must be considered to amines the effect of both different steel of 12 HRC. The applied stress is shown
optimize shaft performance. grades and prior microstructures on as a straight line from zero at the center
the relationship. to a maximum at 52 HRC at the sur-
Induction hardened shafts lend face with no stress concentration factor.
Gregory A. Fett*
themselves very well to most torsional Also shown are the corresponding tor-
Dana Corp. applications because induction hard- sional yield strength values which
Maumee, Ohio ening increases the hardness near the were derived by converting hardness
surface where it is most needed and it to tensile and yield and then using a
leaves the surface in compression, factor of 0.6 to convert yield to tor-
which improves fatigue life. When a sional yield.
shaft is loaded torsionally, the shear Clearly, case depth A will fail first at
stress is highest at the surface and zero the case-core interface. The applied
at the center. In the absence of a stress stress curve exceeds the strength curve
concentration factor, stress increases at the case-core interface. However,
linearly from the center to the surface. case B is able to take full advantage of
Thus, only the surface needs to be the 52 HRC surface hardness. The ap-
hardened to a depth to adequately ex- plied stress curve just touches the
*Member of ASM International and member, ceed the applied stress. When the sur- strength curve at the surface and at the
ASM Heat Treating Society face layer is hardened, martensitic case core interface. Thus, it may fail at
the surface or at the case-core interface.
1,200 Hardening deeper than case B in this
Tensile Torsional situation will do no good because it
Case depth A
HRC HB ULT Yield Yield will fail from the surface even if the
Case depth B
52 514 1793 1614 966
1,000 strength curve is shifted farther to the
50 481 1690 1524 917
40 371 1276 1152 690
right. This is the optimum case depth.
Torsional strength and stress, MPa

30 286 966 941 503 In addition, by hardening too deep, the

800 20 226 759 614 366 residual surface compressive stress
10 187 655 503 303 may be reduced.
0 150 517 366 221 Case depth A has an effective depth
600
From SAE J413 (units are MPa) measured to 40 HRC equal to 15% of
the bar diameter and a total case depth
Case depth B to 20 HRC equal to 25%. Case depth B
Case depth A
has an effective depth of 23% and a
400
total depth of 31%. Although case
depth B (the optimum case depth)
takes full advantage of the situation,
200 case depth A may be sufficient in many
Applied stress applications where the stress is not ex-
cessively high. Case depth A could also
0 be improved if necessary by increasing
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
the core hardness possibly through a
Percent of bar diameter
quench and temper operation.
Fig. 1 — Case depth versus torsional strength and stress. To examine the correlation of actual
HEAT TREATING PROGRESS • OCTOBER 2009 15
 shaft torsional performance to case
depth, test shafts splined at both ends
were induction hardened to varying
case depths. The shafts had diameters
of 28.58 and 38.86 mm (1.125 and 1.530
in.) in the center and a slightly larger
spline on both ends, which caused the
failure to occur in the middle. Different
hardenability steels were used to look
at the relationship of effective and total
case depth. The effect of core hardness
also was studied by using shafts made
of hot-rolled (HR), cold-drawn (CD),
and quench and tempered (Q&T) steels.

16 HEAT TREATING PROGRESS • OCTOBER 2009

Static Torsional Test Results 1,800
Table 1 lists results of static torsional Ultimate 1040 CD ultimate
tests, which also includes data from 1,600 1040 CD yield
production axle shafts made of SAE 1,400 1541 Q&T ultimate
1038 and 1040 steel. It should be noted 1541 Q&T yield

Torsional strength, MPa

that the yield strength was determined 1,200 1541 HR ultimate
by the JEL (Johnson elastic limit) Yield 1541 HR yield
1,000
method, which is defined by a 50% 1050M HR ultimate
change in slope. Also, total case was 800 1050M HR yield
defined as 20 HRC, or the total visual 4140 HR ultimate
case if the core was 20 HRC or greater. 600 4140 HR yield
Effective case versus torsional strength 400 4140 steel 1038 HR ultimate
(Fig. 2). The torsional yield and tor- 1038 HR yield
All others
sional ultimate strengths increase with 200 1040 HR ultimate
case depth up to a certain point, and 1040 HR yield
0
level off at the optimum case depth. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
The bottom line of each curve repre- Effective case depth, % of bar diameter
sents the minimum strength versus Fig. 2 — Effective case versus torsional strength.
case depth values for the steels listed.
The minimum yield for the optimum 1,800
effective case depth of 23% of the bar Ultimate 1040 CD ultimate
diameter is approximately 795 MPa 1,600
1040 CD yield
(115,000 psi). The minimum ultimate 1,400 1541 Q&T ultimate
strength for the same 23% effective
Torsional strength, MPa

1541 Q&T yield

case depth is about 1,379 MPa (200,000 1,200 1541 HR ultimate
psi). SAE 4140 provides a lower tor- 1541 HR yield
sional strength for any given case 1,000 Yield
1050M HR ultimate
depth compared with the rest of the 1050M HR yield
800
steels, except at the far right portion of 4140 HR ultimate
the curve. This is because 4140 has 600 4140 HR yield
higher hardenability, and, hence, a 1038 HR ultimate
lower total case depth for the same ef- 400 1038 HR yield
fective case, indicating that total case 1541, 1541
Q&T, 4140 1040 HR ultimate
depth is also a factor in determining 200
All others 1040 HR yield
torsional strength. At the far right of
0
the curve, all of the steels are about 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
equal, indicating that only effective Total case depth, % of bar diameter
case is important in this area of the Fig. 3 — Total case depth versus torsional strength.
curve.
Total case depth versus torsional 1,400
1040 steel
strength (Fig. 3). This curve is similar to Tensile Torsional
1541 steel HRC HB ULT Yield Yield
that in Fig. 2, except case depth values 1,200 1050M steel
for any given strength are greater (as 52 514 1793 1614 966
4140 steel
Torsional strength and stress, MPa

50 481 1690 1524 917

expected) and there appears to be
1,000 1050M 40 371 1276 1152 690
more variation in the data. The op- 30 286 966 941 503
timum case depth where the yield 4140 20 226 759 614 366
strength levels off is at 31% of the bar 800 10 187 655 503 303
1040 steel
diameter. Again, there is a difference 0 150 517 366 221
in the minimum strength depending 600 From SAE J413 (units are MPa)
on the grade of steel. In these tests, SAE
1541 and 4140 provided a higher tor-
400
sional strength for any given case
1541 Q&T
depth compared with the other steels,
especially in the right hand portion of 200
the curve. This is because the higher Applied stress
hardenability steels have a deeper ef- 0
fective case depth for any given total 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
case depth compared with the rest of Percent of bar diameter
the steels. Also, SAE 1541 has a quench
and tempered core with a greater hard- Fig. 4 — Case depth providing 621 MPa minimum torsional yield strength.
ness. The higher core hardness is sim- accurate predictor. psi). The lower hardenability steels did
ilar to a deeper total case depth. Both Torsional strength versus applied stress so with a shallower effective case and
effective case and total case are impor- (Fig. 4). Case depth for each of the four a deeper total case compared with the
tant in determining torsional strength, steel grades tested provided a min- higher hardenability steels. The 1541
but effective case seems to be a more imum torsional yield of 621 MPa (90,000 with its quench and tempered core did
HEAT TREATING PROGRESS • OCTOBER 2009 17
 so with a shallower effective and shal-
lower total case. This demonstrates that
both effective and total case depths are
important in determining torsional
strength, and there are various ways to
achieve the same strength. In theory,
Fig. 4 indicates that the only two things
that should matter in keeping the
strength curve above the stress curve
are total case depth and surface hard-
ness. However, in reality, both effective
and total case make a difference, and
the higher hardness of the 1050M ma-
terial did not provide a higher strength
even at greater case depths.
1,200
SAE 1040 CD
1541 Q&T
1,000 4140 HR
Cycles at ±407 MPa, ×103
Fatigue Characteristics
Figure 5 shows the fatigue charac-
teristics of the SAE 1040, 1541, and
4140 test shafts. All shafts were run in
fully reversed torsional fatigue at a
stress of 407 MPa (59,000 psi). The data
show the correlation between fatigue
life and torsional yield strength. Con-
siderable scatter, or variation, is
present, which is normal in fatigue
testing. It appears that the plain
carbon-steel grade 1040 reached sus-
pension at 1,000,000 cycles before the
other two grades. A plausible explana-
tion for this is shown in Fig. 4, where
all the case depths have an equal static
strength of 621 MPa (90,000 psi) min-
imum. However, if we look at the ap-
plied stress shown at various levels,
the 1040 has a deeper total case depth,
and the applied stress is somewhat

higher where it intersects the case-core

800
interface. This would seem to indicate
that total case depth may be more crit-
600 ical for fatigue life.
Fatigue life versus total case depth
is shown in Fig. 6. The data demon-
400 strate that fatigue life increases with
increasing total case depth. SAE 1541
steel appears to provide higher fatigue
200 life for the same total case depth com-
pared with the other two materials.
The reason for this is the higher hard-
0 ness of the quench and tempered core,
1 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000
Average torsional yield strength, MPa which essentially acts the same as a
deeper total case depth. SAE 1040 and
Fig. 5 — Fatigue life versus torsional yield strength. 4140 have the same fatigue life even

Table 2 — Required case depth versus torsional strength

Minimum torsional strength
Ultimate, MPa 966 1,138 1,379
Yield, MPa 483 621 793
Typical torsional strength
Ultimate, MPa 1,172 1,310 1,517
Yield, MPa 621 758 862
Diameter, mm Case depth required (effective/total), mm
19.05 2.11/3.81 2.87/4.78 4.39/5.92
22.23 2.44/4.45 3.33/5.56 5.11/6.88
25.40 2.79/5.08 3.81/6.35 5.84/7.87
28.58 3.15/5.72 4.29/7.14 6.58/8.86
31.75 3.51/6.35 4.78/7.95 7.32/9.86
34.93 3.84/6.99 5.23/8.74 8.03/10.82
38.10 4.19/7.62 5.72/9.53 8.76/11.81
41.28 4.55/8.26 6.20/10.31 9.50/12.80
44.45 4.90/8.89 6.68/11.13 10.24/13.79
47.63 5.23/9.53 7.14/11.91 10.95/14.76
50.80 5.59/10.16 7.62/12.70 11.68/15.75
Any diameter 0.11(diam)/0.20(diam) 0.15(diam)/0.25(diam) 0.23(diam)/0.31(diam)
Note: torsional yield strength is valid for longer shafts with length/critical diameter ratio of 6 and greater. The critical diameter is the smallest diameter of the shaft where most of the deflection and
failure occurs. As shaft length decreases, the ratio of yield/ultimate increases. Torsional ultimate strength does not depend on length, and is valid for any length shaft.

18 HEAT TREATING PROGRESS • OCTOBER 2009

though these two steels are on the op- 1,200,000
posite ends of the hardenability spec-
trum. As long as the total case depth 1040 steel
is the same, the fatigue life is the same. 1,000,000 1541 steel
A situation encountered several years 4140 steel
ago serves to illustrate this. A produc-
800,000
tion axle shaft made of SAE 1038 steel

Cycle life, ×103

was not providing the desired fatigue
life, so a more premium grade (SAE 600,000
4140) was substituted. The manufac- 1541 Q&T
turing plant induction hardened the 1040 and 4140
4140 to the same effective case depth 400,000
as the production parts and discovered
that the fatigue life actually decreased
rather than increased. The torsional fa- 200,000

tigue life versus effective case depth

shown in Fig. 7 indicates the reason for
0
this. A 15% effective case with 1040 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
steel provides a fatigue life in excess of Total case depth, % of bar diameter
200,000 cycles, while the same case
Fig. 6 — Torsional fatigue life versus total case depth at ±59,000 psi (±407 MPa).
depth with 4140 provides a life of less
than half of that. The reason is that 1,200,000
4140 has a lower total case depth com-
pared with 1040 due to the difference 1040 steel
in hardenability. To increase the fatigue 1,000,000 1541 steel
life of 4140, it was necessary to increase 4140 steel
the total case depth. This also means
800,000
increasing the effective case along with
Cycle life, ×103

it. In the end, 4140 did not really pro-

vide any benefit in fatigue over the cur- 600,000
rent production parts. 1040 and
1541 Q&T 4140
Applying the Knowledge 400,000
Table 2 illustrates how the results of
this study can be used, where an engi-
neer is trying to design a series of 200,000

shafts to be good for three different tor-

sional strength levels. The middle
column is intended to provide a min-
imum torsional yield of 621 MPa
(90,000 psi). From the data in Figs. 2
and 3, we found that for a plain-carbon
steel such as 1040, this would require
an effective case of 15% of the diam-
eter and a total case of 25%. These per-
centages would also work for other
steels, although the strength may ac-
tually be greater. A higher harden-
ability steel, such as 4140, would re-
quire a 17% effective and 23% total
case. The 621 MPa (90,000 psi) static
yield strength could also be obtained
with a quench and tempered core of
approximately 20 HRC by using an ef-
fective case of 15% and a total case of
19%. However, the quench and temper
operation would also add a fair
amount of cost to the part.
A couple of other examples we
could look at would be minimum tor-
sional yield strength of 485 MPa
(70,000 psi) minimum and the highest
strength shaft of 795 MPa (115,000 psi)
minimum. Figs. 2 and 3 show that the
485 MPa (70,000 psi) shaft would re-
0
0 5
Total case depth, % of bar diameter
Fig. 7 — Torsional fatigue life versus effective case depth at ±59,000 psi (±407 MPa).
quire 11% effective case and 20% total,
while the 795 MPa (115,000 psi) shaft
would need 23% effective and 31%
total. These numbers could be applied
to any diameter shaft, but as the size
increases, the hardenability of the steel
would also have to increase to be able
to obtain these case depths.
Conclusions
Induction case depth plays a very im-
portant part in determining the static
and fatigue properties of shafts. Tor-
sional strength does increase with case
depth, but only to a point, then hard-
ening deeper does no good. Both effec-
tive and total case must be considered
to optimize shaft performance. Effec-
tive case appears to be the best predictor
of torsional strength, while total case is
the best predictor of fatigue life. The re-
lationship between case depth and tor-
sional strength is certain, but there is a
10 15 20 25 30
considerable amount of scatter or vari-
ation. It is easy to see that if the range
of case depths observed was not wide
enough, the relationship could be
missed. Core hardness must also be
considered because it has the same ef-
fect as changing the total case depth.
While fatigue life does correlate to shaft
strength to some degree, there is even
more scatter or variation then with the
case depth versus strength data. Below
200,000 cycles, the scatter from high-to-
low life can be up to 10:1. Above that,
as we approach the fatigue limit, the
scatter can be in excess of 20:1. HTP
Bibliography
Fett, G., Induction Case Depths for Tor-
sional Applications, Metal Progress, p 49-
52, Feb., 1985.
For more information: Gregory Fett, Dana
Corp., Maumee, Ohio; tel: 419-887-3296; e-
mail: greg.fett@dana.com; www.dana.com.

HEAT TREATING PROGRESS • OCTOBER 2009 19