metals

Article

Wear Behavior of Austempered and Quenched

and Tempered Gray Cast Irons under Similar
Hardness
†
Bingxu Wang 1,2, Xue Han 2, Gary C. Barber 2 and Yuming Pan 2,*,
1
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou 310018, China;
bingxuwang@zstu.edu.cn
2
Automotive Tribology Center, Department of Mechanical Engineering, School of Engineering and Computer
Science, Oakland University, Rochester, MI 48309, USA; xhan@oakland.edu
(X.H.); barber@oakland.edu (G.C.B.)
* Correspondence: yumingpan@oakland.edu
† Current address: 201 N. Squirrel Rd Apt 1204, Auburn Hills, MI 48326, USA.
check ror
Received: 14 November 2019; Accepted: 4 December 2019; Published: 8 December 2019 updates

Abstract: In this research, an austempering heat treatment was applied on gray cast iron using various
austempering temperatures ranging from 232 ◦C to 371 ◦C and holding times ranging from 1 min
to 120 min. The microstructure and hardness were examined using optical microscopy and a
Rockwell hardness tester. Rotational ball-on-disk sliding wear tests were carried out to investigate
the wear behavior of austempered gray cast iron samples and to compare with conventional
quenched and tempered gray cast iron samples under equivalent hardness. For the austempered
samples, it was found that acicular ferrite and carbon saturated austenite were formed in the
matrix. The ferritic platelets became coarse when increasing the austempering temperature or
extending the holding time. Hardness decreased due to a decreasing amount of martensite in the
matrix. In wear tests, austempered gray cast iron samples showed slightly higher wear resistance
than quenched and tempered samples under similar hardness while using the austempering
◦ ◦ ◦ ◦
temperatures of 232 C, 260 C, 288 C, and 316 C and distinctly better wear resistance while
using the austempering temperatures of 343 C and 371 ◦C. After analyzing the worn surface,
◦

abrasive wear and fatigue wear with the presence of pits, spalls, voids, long cracks, and wear debris
were the main mechanisms for austempered gray cast iron with a low austempering temperature.
However, only small pits and short cracks were observed on the wear track of austempered gray
cast iron with high austempering temperature. Furthermore, the graphite flakes were exposed and
ground by the counterpart surface during wear tests. Then, the graphite particles would form a
tribo-layer to protect the contact surface.

Keywords: AGI; QTGI; abrasive wear; fatigue wear; graphite tribo-layer

1. Introduction
Gray cast iron (GI) is one of the conventional iron-carbon alloys with a carbon content of 2.5–
4% and a silicon content of 1–3%. Its typical microstructure contains graphite flakes surrounded by
pearlite or ferrite. In terms of morphology, size, and distribution, graphite flakes are divided into
five patterns from A to E in the ASTM Standard A247 [1]. Due to its excellent machinability and
damping capacity with low production cost, GI has been broadly used in the manufacturing of
brake rotors, clutch discs, cylinder liners, and tool mounts. Most of the GI applications require superior
resistance to retard wear loss on contact surfaces. Therefore, heat treatment processes such as
austempering treatment and quenching and tempering treatment are expected to provide benefits
for the tribological properties of GI.
The austempering heat treatment was first proposed by Edgar C. Bain in the 1930s [2]. In this
process, GI is austenitized above the Acm critical temperature to convert the ferrite or pearlite into
Metals 2019, 9, 1329; doi:10.3390/met9121329 www.mdpi.com/journal/metals
Metals 2019, 9, 1329 2 of 13

unstable austenite. Then, the full austenitized GI is transferred and soaked in a salt bath furnace at
a constant temperature for a specific period. The isothermal temperatures should be between the
pearlite formation temperature and martensite formation temperature, which are similar to the bainite
formation temperatures of steel. The final microstructure of austempered gray cast iron (AGI)
consists of acicular ferrite and carbon saturated austenite. In the austempering process, a salt bath
furnace is typically used in order to eliminate or minimize surface oxidation and carburization.
A quenching and tempering treatment is one common heat treatment process applied on cast irons
and steels. Additional tempering is introduced on as-quenched materials to improve the ductility
and relieve some internal stress. The tempering temperature should be set below the eutectoid
temperature. Precise control of tempering temperature and holding duration is vital for the desired
mechanical properties. In the tempering process, the martensite formed during the quenching step
is transformed into tempered martensite by carbon precipitation and diffusion.
The tribological performance of GI has been studied by several researchers using different alloy
elements and heat treatment processes through various test configurations. Hassani et al. [3] studied
the influence of hard carbide forming elements such as vanadium and chromium on the wear properties
of GI by using a pin-on-disk rotational fixture. The presence of vanadium and chromium induced
the formation of oxidative layers to reduce the wear loss. Sarkar et al. [4] investigated the wear
behavior of copper alloyed AGI using six austempering temperatures by a block-on-roller
tribometer. Low wear resistance was obtained for high austempering temperature due to the
significant drop in hardness and tensile strength. Vadiraj [5] studied the wear resistance of
quenched and tempered gray cast iron (QTGI) on a pin-on-disk test rig. It was found that the wear
rate increased when increasing the tempering temperature. This was attributed to the softening of the
martensitic matrix with the tempering reaction. Vadiraj et al. [6] also evaluated the wear performance
of a series of alloyed AGIs using a pin-on-disk tribometer. The specific wear rate had a decreasing
trend when increasing the graphite content since more graphite could be engaged into the contact
interface as solid lubricant. Furthermore, the wear rate would increase when the ferritic laths became
thick due to the low wear resistance of the soft ferrite phase. Balachandran et al. [7] found that the
wear resistance of AGI was degraded after adding nickel alloy since the presence of nickel would
stabilize the austenite and inhibit the stress induced transformation.
Some recent studies have reported better wear resistance of AGI compared with as-cast GI [8–
10]. However, few research studies have paid attention to the comparison of the tribological
characteristics between AGI and conventional QTGI. Since it has been well known that the wear
resistance of cast irons and steels is often correlated with surface hardness, the comparison in wear
resistance is reasonable under equivalent hardness [11–14]. In the current research, AGI samples
were prepared by a wide range of austempering temperatures and holding times. Various
tempering temperatures were applied on quenched GI to match the hardness of AGI samples for the
comparison in wear performance. Wear resistance of AGI and QTGI samples was tested using a
rotational ball-on-disk sliding rig. In addition, the microstructure of AGI and QTGI produced by the
different heat treatment parameters was evaluated by optical microscopy, and the worn surface was
examined through scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy
(EDS) to analyze the potential mechanisms. The results will be helpful for the possible substitution
of traditional QTGI by AGI in existing and future applications.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Chemical Composition

The percentage of main alloy elements of the GI was measured by a carbon-sulfur analyzer
(CS-200, LECO, San Jose, MI, USA) and an optical spectrometer (3460, Applied Research
Laboratories ARL, Austin, TX, USA), as shown in Table 1. More specific details of the GI used in
this research are available on the supplier’s website at www.mcmaster.com/8928k79.
Metals 2019, 9, 1329 3 of 13

Table 1. Alloy content for gray cast iron.

Elements Percentage
Carbon, C 3.53%
Silicon, Si 2.71%
Manganese, Mn 0.74%
Chromium, Cr 0.12%
Copper, Cu 0.94%
Sulfur, S 0.03%
Phosphorous, P 0.08%
Iron, Fe Remainder

2.2. As-Cast Gray Cast Iron

The original microstructure of the as-cast GI is shown in Figure 1. The main components in the
matrix were graphite flakes, ferrite, and pearlite.

Figure 1. Original microstructure of as-cast gray cast iron.

2.3. Austempering Heat Treatment

The as-cast GI samples were austenitized at a temperature of 832 ◦C for 20 min in a medium
temperature salt bath furnace (50% KCl + 20% NaCl + 30% CaCl2). The pearlite was transformed
into unstable austenite, and the alloy elements were distributed uniformly. Then, the fully
austenitized GI samples were quickly transferred to another pre-heated low temperature salt bath
furnace (50% KNO3 + 50% NaNO3) for the austempering process at various austempering
temperatures (232 ◦C, 260 ◦C, 288 ◦C, 316 ◦C, 343 ◦C, and 371 ◦C) and holding times (1 min, 2
min, 3 min, 6 min, 10 min, 20 min, 30 min, 60 min, 90 min, and 120 min). The above parameters were
selected in terms of the previous related research [6,10,15–19]. Then, the AGI samples were cooled to
room temperature by water. The austempering process diagram is displayed in Figure 2a and Table
2.

Figure 2. Heat treatment processes: (a) austempering heat treatment; (b) quenching and tempering
heat treatment.
Metals 2019, 9, 1329 4 of 13

Table 2. Details of heat treatment designs and experiments.

Heat Treatment Designs

Austempering Heat Treatment (AGI)
Temperature: 832 ◦C;
Austenitizing Process: Time: 20 min;
Medium Temp Salt Bath Furnace
Temperatures: 232 ◦C, 260 ◦C, 288 ◦C,
316 ◦C, 343 ◦C, 371 ◦C;
Austempering Process: Times: 1 min, 2 min, 3 min, 6 min, 10 min, 20 min, 30 min,
60 min, 90 min and 120 min;
Water Cool;
Low Temp Salt Bath Furnace
Quenching and Tempering Heat Treatment (QTGI)
Temperature: 832 ◦C;
Austenitizing Process: Time: 20 min;
Oil Cool;
Medium Temp Salt Bath Furnace
Temperatures: 316 ◦C, 371 ◦C, 399 ◦C, 454 ◦C, 482 ◦C, 510 ◦C;
Tempering Process: Time: 60 min;
Oil Cool;
Electrical Heating Furnace
Experiments
Metallurgical Evaluations
Sample AGI and QTGI Coupons (15 mm 15 mm 15 mm)
× ×
Etching 3% Nital for 2 s or 3 s
Test Facility Optical Microscopy with 500 Magnification
×
Sample Size 16
Hardness Measurements
Sample AGI and QTGI Sample Coupons/Disks
Test Facility Rockwell Hardness Tester
Repetition 3 Times
Sample Size 234
Wear Tests
Alumina Ball (Diameter: 7.94 mm; Hardness: 75 HRC;
Upper Sample Surface Roughness (Ra): 10 nm)
Lower Sample AGI and QTGI Disks (Diameter: 64 mm; Thickness: 11 mm; Surface Roughness (Ra): 300 nm)
≈
Normal Load 300 N
Rotational Speed 240 rpm
Lubricant PAO4 Base Oil
Test Duration 30 min
Test Facility Rotational Ball-on-Disk Sliding Configuration
Repetition 3 Times
Sample Size 36

2.4. Quenching and Tempering Heat Treatment

The as-cast GI samples were first austenitized at a temperature of 832 ◦C for 20 min in a
medium temperature salt bath furnace (50% KCl + 20% NaCl + 30% CaCl2) to obtain unstable
austenite. After that, the fully austenitized GI samples were quenched by oil. Then, different
tempering temperatures (316 ◦C, 371 ◦C, 399 ◦C, 454 ◦C, 482 ◦C, 510 ◦C) with a constant holding
time of 60 min were applied on quenched GI samples to match the hardness of the AGI samples,
respectively. The tempering process was conducted using an electrical heating furnace under air
atmosphere (Lindberg-M, Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA). Finally, the tempered samples were
cooled to room temperature in oil. The quenching and tempering process diagram is displayed in
Figure 2b, and Table 2 gives the details.

2.5. Metallurgical Evaluation

Fifteen millimeter cubic coupons were used for metallurgical evaluation. Coupons were hot
mounted using Diallyl Phthalate powder. The coupons were ground and polished to a mirror-like
Metals 2019, 9, 1329 5 of 13

surface using Si-carbide sandpaper from 240 grit to 1200 grit and polishing cloths with 0.3 µm alumina
oxide suspension. Then, coupons were thoroughly rinsed by water and etched by 3% nital solutions
for 2 s to 3 s. Metallurgical evaluation was carried out using optical microscopy (PME-3, Olympus,
Tokyo, Japan).

2.6. Rotational Ball-on-Disk Sliding Wear Test

Sliding wear tests were conducted on a universal mechanical tribometer (UMT-3, Bruker,
Billica, MA, USA) with a rotational ball-on-disk configuration at room temperature. An alumina ball
was used as the counterpart to simulate the ceramic ball bearings. The dimensions of the AGI and
QTGI sample disks are shown in Figure 3. The AGI and QTGI sample disks were ground and
polished to approximately 300 nm (Arithmetic Roughness/Ra), which was measured by a 3-
dimensional surface profilometer (ContourGT-K, Bruker, Billica, MA, USA). The normal load was
300 N, and the rotational speed was 240 rpm. In sliding wear tests, the sample disks were
submerged into PAO4 base oil (kinematic viscosity of 16.8 cSt at 40 ◦C). The test duration was 30
min. Each test was repeated three times, and the averages were reported. After the wear tests, an
SEM (JSM-6510, JEOL, Tokyo, Japan) equipped with EDS was used to observe the worn tracks for
potential mechanisms. The details of the wear tests are summarized in Table 2.

Figure 3. Sectional view of the rotational ball-on-disk sliding wear test fixture.

2.7. Rockwell C Hardness Measurement

The hardness of the GI samples under different heat treatments was measured by a Rockwell
hardness tester (R-260, LECO, St. Joseph, MI, USA) under the ASTM Standard E18-16 [20]. The sample
surfaces were first ground flat and then polished by Si-carbide sandpaper with 240 grit before each
hardness measurement. Each sample was measured three times and then averaged (Table 2).

3. Results

3.1. Metallurgical Evaluation of AGI and QTGI

As compared with the microstructure of as-cast GI in Figure 1, no changes could be found
related to the characteristics of graphite flakes after receiving the austempering heat treatment. The
original pearlitic structure was transformed into acicular ferrite and carbon saturated austenite, as
shown in Figure 4. Figure 4a,c,e,g,i shows the microstructure of AGI samples at the beginning of the
transformation reaction under each austempering temperature. It could be seen that the amount of
acicular phases became more with decreasing austempering temperature because of the high degree
of supercooling. It was also observed that most of the thin needle-like ferrite initiated around
graphite flakes where the potential energy was high. After extending the holding duration, thin needle-
like ferrite grew coarse since more carbon atoms diffused into adjacent austenitic areas, as is evident
in Figure 4b,d,f,h,j. In addition, ferritic sheaves became thicker after increasing the austempering
temperature, and feather-like ferrite
Metals 2019, 9, 1329 6 of 13

was formed in the matrix at the austempering temperature of 371 ◦C with the holding time of 120
min. In Figure 4b,d,f,h,j, the light areas are carbon saturated austenite, which were stable at room
temperature. In addition, some researchers reported that the carbon saturated austenite would be
decomposed into the equivalent ferrite and carbide once the holding time was too long. The
formation of ferrite and carbide would degrade the mechanical properties of austempered cast irons
[21–24]. In the present research, no carbidic particles and islands could be found among the ferritic
plates when the highest austempering temperature and longest holding duration were applied, which
suggested that the carbon saturated austenite had not been decomposed into equilibrium phases.

Figure 4. Metallurgical evaluation of AGI Samples Produced by different austempering temperatures

◦ ◦ ◦ ◦
and holding durations: (a) 232 C, 20 min; (b) 232 C, 120 min; (c) 288 C, 3 min; (d) 288 C, 120 min; (e)
◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦
316 C, 2 min; (f) 316 C, 120 min; (g) 343 C, 1 min; (h) 343 C, 120 min; (i) 371 C, 1 min; (j) 371 C,
120 min.
Metals 2019, 9, 1329 7 of 13

In the microstructure analysis of QTGI samples, graphite flakes were retained, and as-
quenched martensite and retained austenite were transformed into tempered martensite containing the
cementitic and ferritic phases, as shown in Figure 5. When increasing the tempering temperatures
with the same holding time, the cementite particles continuously developed. Finally, coarse cementite
particles could be found within the ferritic matrix.

Figure 5. Metallurgical evaluation of QTGI samples produced by different tempering temperatures: (a)
◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦
316 C; (b) 371 C; (c) 399 C; (d) 454 C; (e) 482 C; (f) 510 C.

3.2. Hardness Measurement

The hardness measurements of AGI and QTGI samples are plotted in Figures 6 and 7. At the
same austempering temperature, the hardness of AGI samples decreased first when extending the
holding time and became almost constant after a critical point in time. When using the long holding
time, more unstable austenite was transformed into acicular ferrite and carbon saturated austenite
rather than martensite, which would result in the decrease in hardness. The hardness of AGI under
each austempering temperature becoming gradually flat indicated that most of the acicular ferrite and
carbon saturated austenite were still maintained in the matrix. Otherwise, the hardness would vary
once the carbon saturated austenite was decomposed [24,25]. This suggested that the longest
holding time utilized in the present work was within the “processing window”, which was defined
as the time interval between where 3% martensite existed and where 10% stable austenite was
decomposed [26]. The hardness measurements also demonstrated that there were no carbides found
in the matrix, as mentioned in Section 3.1. For the same holding time, AGI samples became softer
when increasing the austempering temperature. This is because the high carbon diffusion rate
accelerated the transformation of acicular ferrite and carbon saturated austenite. For QTGI samples, it
could be seen that the hardness decreased with increasing tempering temperature. The slight
increase in hardness under tempering temperatures of 371 ◦C was probably caused by the effects of
tempered brittleness [27–29]. Increasing the tempering temperature would promote the
decomposition of martensite into dispersive cementite particles and ferrite, which facilitated the
softening rate.
Metals 2019, 9, 1329 8 of 13

Figure 6. Rockwell C hardness of AGI under various austempering temperatures and holding times.

Figure 7. Rockwell C hardness of QTGI under various tempering temperatures.

3.3. Ball-on-Disk Rotational Wear Tests

In the rotational ball-on-disk sliding wear tests, fully transformed AGI samples with a 120 min
holding time at each austempering temperature were utilized and compared with corresponding
QTGI samples under equivalent hardness, as shown in Table 3 and Figure 8. The upper error bars
represent the maximum wear loss, and lower error bars represent the minimum wear loss of AGI
and QTGI samples under each heat treatment condition. In Groups 1, 2, and 3, AGI samples had
higher wear volume loss when increasing the austempering temperature since the softening effect
dominated the wear resistance. A similar behavior was also found on QTGI samples even though
the hardness was improved slightly in Group 2 since it has been reported that the tempered
brittleness would significantly reduce the toughness and promote wear loss [27,30]. In Groups 4 and
5, higher austempering temperature could enhance the carbon content and austenitic percentage. More
austenite with a high percentage of carbon would provide superior fracture toughness to inhibit
material removal, which could compensate for the reduction in hardness. Similar results were
reported by Yang, J et al. [31] in the study of tensile toughness and fracture toughness in dual step
austempered ductile iron with high austenitic content and carbon content. The QTGI samples in Groups
4 and 5 also showed lower wear volume loss, which could be associated with the presence of a
significant amount of dispersive coarse cementite particles. Dong, C et al. [32] found that coarse
granular cementite phases could have a large binding force, which could slow down the cleavage
separations inside the matrix of tempered steel. In Group 6, scuffing with high vibration and noise
occurred on both AGI and QTGI samples because of the low hardness. Overall, AGI samples had
slightly lower wear volume loss than QTGI samples under similar hardness, approximately 6%,
6.2%, 8.4%, and 6.5% while using the
Metals 2019, 9, 1329 9 of 13

austempering temperatures of 232 ◦C, 260 ◦C, 288 ◦C, and 316 ◦C and distinctly better wear resistance
while using the austempering temperatures of 343 ◦C and 371 ◦C. The best result with a wear loss
of around 0.44 mm3 was obtained using AGI samples with the austempering temperature of 343 ◦C,
which was 21.7% lower than that of QTGI samples. In all wear tests, the upper ceramic balls were
much harder than GI disks and had no detectable wear scars.

Table 3. Average hardness of AGI and QTGI sample groups in rotational ball-on-disk sliding wear tests.

Group Number 1 2 3 4 5 6
◦
Austempering Temperature ( C) 232 260 288 316 343 371
Hardness (HRC) 42.3 42 37.4 28.9 28.1 26.8
◦
Tempering Temperature ( C) 316 371 399 454 482 510
Hardness (HRC) 41.1 41.8 38 29.5 28.7 27.2

Figure 8. Wear volume loss of AGI and QTGI samples under equivalent hardness.

3.4. Worn Surface Analysis

SEM analysis was conducted to evaluate the worn surface of AGI samples; see Figure 9. It can
be seen that cracks spread out on the wear track. In Group 1, which was also representative of
Groups 2 and 3 (Figure 9a), some parallel grooves along the sliding direction were found on the wear
track, which suggested abrasive wear was one of the main mechanisms for these AGI samples with
relatively high hardness. Furthermore, some spalls were observed, which were caused by the linkages of
cracks on the surface and sub-surface, which introduced fatigue wear as another main mechanism. It
is well known that the tips of graphite flakes act as stress concentration sites. Cracks can nucleate
around graphite flakes and grow towards the adjacent graphite flakes and the outer surface easily due
to the brittleness of AGI samples. During the wear tests, voids were produced by the graphite
flakes being peeled out from the surface. Similar findings were also reported by Sarkar, T et al.
[4,10]. In addition, they concluded that adhesive wear with plastic flow and oxidative wear were
also important mechanisms for AGI. However, plastic flow and oxidation areas were not detected in
the current research. As the wear test continued, large scale debris was broken up into small wear
debris. Then, the small particles would plough the AGI surfaces under the high Hertzian contact
stress; see Figure 10a.
In Group 5, which was also representative of Group 4 (Figure 9b), more darks spots were seen than
in Group 1. These dark spots were identified as carbon by using EDS; see Figure 9c. On the wear
track, only small pits and cracks could be found, and the crack length was shorter than that in Group 1.
These findings could be explained as follows: More stable austenite in Group 5 with high carbon
content could withstand severe plastic deformation on the surface and sub-surface under the high
shearing force. The resulting higher fracture toughness would retard the nucleation and
propagation of cracks. Therefore, no spalls were observed. Under high normal load and shear force,
the graphite flakes on the
Metals 2019, 9, 1329 10 of 13

surface and sub-surface would be deformed with the substrate along the sliding direction. Graphite
flakes were then exposed and ground by the ceramic ball to produce graphite powder. The graphite
powder resulted in a tribo-layer which lowered the wear, as shown in Figure 10b.

Figure 9. Surface evaluation on wear track: (a) AGI sample in Group 1; (b) AGI sample in Group 5; (c)
elemental examination of dark spot by EDS.

Figure 10. Cont.

Metals 2019, 9, 1329 11 of 13

Figure 10. Potential failure mechanisms on AGI Samples in sliding wear tests: (a) production of wear
debris; (b) formation of graphite tribo-layer.

4. Conclusions
In this research, AGI samples were prepared using different austempering temperatures and
holding durations. Rotational ball-on-disk sliding wear tests were carried out on AGI samples and
compared with conventional QTGI samples under similar hardness. In addition, microstructure and
hardness were evaluated using optical microscopy and a Rockwell hardness tester. Several conclusions
can be drawn: The original pearlite was transformed into acicular ferrite and carbon saturated austenite
in the austempering heat treatment. Most of the ferritic platelets nucleated around graphite flakes
due to the high potential energy. Thin needle-like ferrite became coarse after increasing the
austempering temperature or extending the holding time. The hardness of AGI samples decreased
when either increasing the austempering temperature or extending the holding time and became
nearly constant beyond a critical time (mostly between 20 min to 30 min). This critical time occurred
when the phase transformation had been fully completed in the matrix. The hardness drop was caused
by the formation of soft acicular ferrite and stable austenite rather than hard martensite. The slight
increase in hardness of QTGI samples while using the tempering temperature of 371 ◦C was
associated with the effects of tempered brittleness. In rotational ball-on-disk sliding wear tests, the
average wear volume loss of AGI samples was slightly lower than that of QTGI samples under
equivalent hardness, approximately 6%, 6.2%, 8.4%, and 6.5% while using the austempering
◦ ◦ ◦ ◦
temperatures of 232 C, 260 C, 288 C, and 316 C, respectively. In addition, excellent wear
resistance of AGI samples was found while using the austempering temperatures of 343 ◦C and 371
◦
C. The best result having a wear loss around 0.44 mm 3 was obtained using AGI samples with the
austempering temperature of 343 ◦C, which was 21.7% lower than that of QTGI samples. In the analysis
of worn tracks, AGI samples produced by low austempering temperature showed abrasive wear and
fatigue wear mechanisms with the presence of pits, spalls, voids, and long cracks on the wear track.
However, only small pits and short cracks could be detected on the wear track of AGI samples with
a high austempering temperature. It was believed the graphite flakes were ground during the wear
tests. Then, the graphite particles would form a tribo-layer to protect the contact surface.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, B.W. and G.C.B.; methodology, B.W. and Y.P.; data curation, B.W.;
formal analysis, B.W., X.H. and Y.P.; investigation, B.W., X.H. and Y.P.; resources, G.C.B.; writing, original
draft preparation, B.W. and Y.P.; writing, review and editing, B.W. and G.C.B.; project administration, G.C.B.
Metals 2019, 9, 1329 12 of 13

Funding: This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. ASTM International. ASTM Standard A247-Standard Test Method for Evaluating the Microstructure of Graphite in
Iron Castings; ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2017.
2. Bain, E.C. Functions of the Alloying Elements in Steel; American Society for Metals: Materials Park, OH,
USA, 1939.
3. Hassani, A.; Habibollahzadeh, A.; Sadeghinejad, S. Influence of Vanadium and Chromium Additions on the
Wear Resistance of a Gray Cast Iron. Int. J. Min. Metall. Mater. 2012, 19, 602–607. [CrossRef]
4. Sarkar, T.; Bose, P.; Sutradhar, G. Mechanical and Tribological Characteristics of Copper Alloyed Austempered
Gray Cast Iron (AGI). Mater. Today Proc. 2018, 5, 3664–3673. [CrossRef]
5. Vadiraj, A.; Balachandran, G.; Kamaraj, M.; Kazuya, E. Mechanical and Wear Behavior of Quenched and
Tempered Alloyed Hypereutectic Gray Cast Iron. Mater. Des. 2011, 32, 2438–2443. [CrossRef]
6. Vadiraj, A.; Balachandran, G.; Kamaraj, M.; Gopalakrisshna, B.; Rao, K. Structure-Property Correlation in
Austempered Alloyed Hypereutectic Gray Cast Irons. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2010, 527, 782–788. [CrossRef]
7. Balachandran, G.; Vadiraj, A.; Kamaraj, M.; Kazuya, E. Mechanical and Wear Behavior of Alloyed Gray
Cast Iron in the Quenched and Tempered and Austempered Conditions. Mater. Des. 2011, 2, 4042–4049.
[CrossRef]
8. Vadiraj, A.; Balachandran, G.; Kamaraj, M.; Gopalakrishna, B.; Rao, K. Studies on Mechanical and Wear
Properties of Alloyed Hypereutectic Gray Cast Irons in the As-Cast Pearlitic and Austempered
Conditions. Mater. Des. 2010, 31, 951–955. [CrossRef]
9. Ghaderi, A.; Ahmadabadi, M.; Ghasemi, H. Effect of Graphite Morphologies on the Tribological Behavior
of Austempered Cast Iron. Wear 2003, 255, 410–416. [CrossRef]
10. Sarkar, T.; Sutradhara, G. Investigation of Austenitizing Temperature on Wear Behavior of Austempered
Gray Iron (AGI). IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2016, 149, 012048. [CrossRef]
11. Solic, S.; Godec, M.; Schauperl, Z.; Donik, C. Improvement in Abrasion Wear Resistance and Microstructure
Changes with Deep Cryogenic Treatment of Austempered Ductile Cast Iron (ADI). Metall. Mater. Trans. A
2016, 47, 5058–5070. [CrossRef]
12. Sahin, Y.; Erdogan, M.; Kilicli, V. Wear Behavior of Austempered Ductile Irons with Dual Matrix Structures.
Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2007, 444, 31–38. [CrossRef]
13. Haseeb, A.; Islam, M.; Bepari, M. Tribological Behavior of Quenched and Tempered, and Austempered
Ductile Iron at the Same Hardness Level. Wear 2000, 244, 15–19. [CrossRef]
14. PourAsiabi, H.; Saghafian, H.; Pourasiabi, H. Effect of Austempering Process on Microstructure and Wear
Behavior of Ductile Iron Containing Mn-Ni-Cu-Mo. Met. Mater. Int. 2013, 19, 67–76. [CrossRef]
15. Wang, B.; Barber, G.; Sun, X.; Shaw, M.; Seaton, P. Characteristics of the Transformation of Retained Austenite
in Tempered Austempered Ductile Iron. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2017, 26, 2095–2101. [CrossRef]
16. Wang, B.; Barber, G.; Qiu, F.; Zou, Q.; Yang, H. A Review: Phase Transformation and Wear Mechanisms
of Single-Step and Dual-Step Austempered Ductile Iron. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2019. [CrossRef]
17. Wang, C.; Du, X.; Li, S.; Sun, Y.; Yang, P. Morphology and Crystallography of Ausferrite in Austempered
Ductile Iron. Metals 2017, 7, 238. [CrossRef]
18. Konca, E.; Tur, K.; Koc, E. Effects of Alloying Elements (Mo, Ni, and Cu) on the Austemperability of GGG-60
Ductile Cast Iron. Metals 2017, 7, 320. [CrossRef]
19. Sellamuthu, P.; Smuel, D.; Dinakaran, D.; Premkumar, V. Austempered Ductile Iron (ADI): Influence of
Austempering Temperature on Microstructure, Mechanical and Wear Properties and Energy
Consumption. Metals 2018, 8, 53. [CrossRef]
20. ASTM International. ASTM Standard E18-16-Standard Test Methods for Rockwell Hardness of Metallic Materials;
ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2016.
21. Amran, Y.; Katsman, A.; Schaaf, P.; Bamberger, M. Influence of Copper Addition and Temperature on the
Kinetics of Austempering in Ductile Iron. Metall. Mater. Trans. B 2010, 41, 1052–1058. [CrossRef]
22. Gorny, M.; Tyrala, E.; Lopez, H. Effect of Copper and Nickel on the Transformation Kinetics of Austempered
Ductile Iron. J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2014, 23, 3505–3510. [CrossRef]
Metals 2019, 9, 1329 13 of 13

23. Wang, B.; Barber, G.; Tao, C.; Han, X.; Sun, X. Tribological Performance of Austempered and Tempered
Ductile Iron. Metall. Mater. Trans. B 2018, 49, 2261–2269. [CrossRef]
24. Panneerelvam, S.; Martis, C.; Putatunda, S.; Boileau, J. An investigation on the Stability of Austenite in
Austempered Ductile Cast Iron (ADI). Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2015, 626, 237–246. [CrossRef]
25. Tyrala, E.; Gorny, M.; Kawalec, M.; Muszynska, A.; Lopez, H. Evaluation of Volume Fraction of Austenite in
Austempering Process of Austempered Ductile Iron. Metals 2019, 9, 893. [CrossRef]
26. Zahiri, S.; Pereloma, E.; Davies, C. Model for Prediction of Processing Window for Austempered Ductile
Iron. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2002, 18, 1163–1167. [CrossRef]
27. Mutavdzic, M.; Lazic, V.; Milosavljevic, D.; Aleksandrovic, S.; Nikolic, R.; Cukic, R. Determination of the
Optimal Tempering Temperature in the Hard Facing of the Forging Dies. Mater. Eng. 2012, 19, 95–103.
28. Chandra, T.; Ionescu, M.; Mantovani, D. Effect of Tempering on Mechanical Properties and Microstructure of
1 9% Cr Heat Treatment Steel. Mater. Sci. Forum 2012, 706–709, 841–846.
29. Materkowski, J.; Krauss, G. Tempered Martensite Embrittlement in SAE 4340 Steel. Metall. Mater. Trans. A
1979, 10, 1643–1651. [CrossRef]
30. Wei, M.; Wang, S.; Wang, L.; Cui, X.; Chen, K. Effect of Tempering Conditions on Wear Resistance in Various
Wear Mechanisms of H13 Steel. Tribol. Int. 2011, 44, 898–905. [CrossRef]
31. Yang, J.; Putatunda, S. Improvement in Strength and Toughness of Austempered Ductile Cast Iron by A
Novel Two-Step Austempering Process. Mater. Des. 2004, 25, 219–230. [CrossRef]
32. Dong, C.; Wu, H.; Wang, X. Effect of Tempering Temperatures on Microstructure and Properties of 0.28C-
0.22Ti Wear Resistance Steel. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2018, 34, 86–94. [CrossRef]

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).