GCr15 vs GCr15Mo – Composition, Heat Treatment, Properties, and Applications
แบ่งปัน
Table Of Content
Table Of Content
Introduction
GCr15 and GCr15Mo are two closely related bearing steels commonly specified for rolling-element bearings, shafts, and other high-contact, wear-prone components. Engineers, procurement managers, and production planners routinely weigh trade-offs such as cost, fatigue life, hardenability, and post‑weld processing when choosing between them. Typical decision contexts include selecting the most cost‑effective material for standard bearings versus specifying a slightly more alloyed steel when higher resistance to tempering or superior fatigue performance is required.
The principal technical difference is the addition of molybdenum in GCr15Mo; this alloying element increases hardenability and improves tempering resistance, which can translate into better fatigue performance under high contact stresses. Because composition and heat treatment govern microstructure, the two grades are often compared for identical dimensions and loading conditions to determine whether the marginal material cost for molybdenum is justified.
1. Standards and Designations
- GB (China): GCr15, GCr15Mo (or GCr15SiMn in variants)
- JIS (Japan) / AISI equivalents: GCr15 ≈ JIS SUJ2 / AISI 52100 (bearing steel)
- EN: EN ISO equivalents often referenced as 1.3505 (52100) for GCr15-like steels; Mo-bearing equivalents may be classed under other EN numbers depending on exact chemistry and naming
- ASTM/ASME: No exact ASTM designation for GCr15; AISI 52100 is commonly used in international contexts
Classification: - Both grades are high‑carbon chrome bearing steels (tooling/rolling-bearing steels), not stainless steels or HSLA. GCr15 is a high‑carbon chromium alloy steel; GCr15Mo is the same base chemistry with controlled molybdenum addition (an alloying enhancement).
2. Chemical Composition and Alloying Strategy
| Element | Typical GCr15 (representative ranges) | Typical GCr15Mo (representative ranges) |
|---|---|---|
| C | 0.95 – 1.05 wt% | 0.95 – 1.05 wt% |
| Mn | 0.25 – 0.45 wt% | 0.25 – 0.45 wt% |
| Si | 0.15 – 0.35 wt% | 0.15 – 0.35 wt% |
| P | ≤ 0.025 wt% | ≤ 0.025 wt% |
| S | ≤ 0.025 wt% | ≤ 0.025 wt% |
| Cr | 1.30 – 1.65 wt% | 1.30 – 1.65 wt% |
| Ni | ≤ 0.30 wt% | ≤ 0.30 wt% |
| Mo | ~ 0 wt% (trace) | 0.06 – 0.25 wt% (typical range) |
| V, Nb, Ti, B, N | Typically controlled at low levels; may be present in trace microalloying amounts depending on supplier | Same, with Mo as the principal intentional addition |
Notes: The table gives representative ranges commonly encountered in supplier datasheets and national standards. Exact limits depend on the specific standard and producer; always consult the applicable material specification for procurement.
How the alloying affects performance: - Carbon (C): Provides the matrix for martensite formation and high hardness after quenching; higher carbon increases achievable hardness and wear resistance but reduces weldability and ductility. - Chromium (Cr): Improves hardenability, wear resistance, and tempering behavior; 1–1.6% Cr is typical for classical bearing steels. - Manganese (Mn) and Silicon (Si): Deoxidizers and alloying additions that modestly influence hardenability and strength. - Molybdenum (Mo): Increases hardenability and improves resistance to tempering (i.e., maintains toughness and hardness at elevated tempering temperatures). Mo also refines secondary hardening behavior and can improve rolling-contact fatigue life. - Sulfur and phosphorus are controlled to low levels to avoid embrittlement and maintain fatigue performance.
3. Microstructure and Heat Treatment Response
Typical starting microstructures and responses:
- Annealed / Soft‑annealed condition:
- Both grades are commonly supplied in a soft‑annealed state for machining, producing spheroidized carbides in a ferritic matrix. This promotes machinability and formability prior to final hardening.
- Quenched and tempered condition:
- After austenitizing and oil or controlled quenching, both steels form a predominantly martensitic matrix with carbide particles (mainly chromium carbides and cementite). Tempering reduces internal stresses and adjusts the hardness–toughness balance.
- GCr15Mo displays slightly better tempering resistance: after tempering at a given temperature, retained hardness and secondary hardening tendencies are improved compared with plain GCr15. This enables GCr15Mo to retain a tougher, less over‑tempered microstructure at elevated tempering temperatures or during exposure to higher operating temperatures.
- Normalizing and thermo‑mechanical processing:
- Normalizing refines grain size in both grades; Mo presence slows recrystallization and can help suppress grain growth during high‑temperature cycles, aiding in larger components that require deep hardenability.
- Hardenability:
- GCr15Mo exhibits higher hardenability than GCr15 due to Mo; this is especially beneficial for larger cross sections where through‑hardening is required to achieve consistent core hardness and fatigue resistance.
4. Mechanical Properties
Representative mechanical properties after typical quench and temper cycles (values are guideline ranges; suppliers and heat treatments produce specific values):
| Property | GCr15 (typical after Q&T) | GCr15Mo (typical after Q&T) |
|---|---|---|
| Tensile strength (MPa) | 1400 – 2100 | 1500 – 2200 |
| Yield strength (MPa) | 800 – 1400 | 900 – 1500 |
| Elongation (%) | 4 – 12 | 4 – 12 (similar ranges; can be slightly higher at same hardness) |
| Impact toughness (Charpy, J) | Highly heat‑treatment dependent; low at very high hardness (single digits to 20s) | Typically comparable or modestly better at equivalent hardness due to Mo improving tempering resistance |
| Hardness (HRC) | 58 – 66 (bearing race/hardened condition) | 58 – 66 (can achieve similar hardness with improved tempering stability) |
Interpretation: - Strength: Both grades can achieve similar peak hardness and tensile strength after appropriate hardening. GCr15Mo tends to provide modestly higher retained strength in service or after higher tempering due to Mo. - Toughness: At equivalent hardness levels, GCr15Mo typically offers slightly better fatigue resistance and toughening because Mo stabilizes the tempered martensite and retards softening during tempering — beneficial for rolling-contact fatigue. - Ductility: Both maintain low ductility at high hardness levels; design should account for limited plasticity in bearing components.
5. Weldability
Weldability is driven primarily by carbon content and hardenability-inducing alloy elements. Both GCr15 and GCr15Mo are high‑carbon bearing steels and are considered difficult to weld without special procedures.
Two common empirical weldability formulas:
-
IIW Carbon Equivalent: $$CE_{IIW} = C + \frac{Mn}{6} + \frac{Cr+Mo+V}{5} + \frac{Ni+Cu}{15}$$
-
International Pcm formula: $$P_{cm} = C + \frac{Si}{30} + \frac{Mn+Cu}{20} + \frac{Cr+Mo+V}{10} + \frac{Ni}{40} + \frac{Nb}{50} + \frac{Ti}{30} + \frac{B}{1000}$$
Qualitative interpretation: - Both grades have high $C$ and non‑negligible Cr; adding Mo in GCr15Mo increases the $(Cr+Mo+V)$ term in $CE_{IIW}$ and $P_{cm}$, so GCr15Mo generally gives a higher carbon equivalent and therefore a higher propensity for weld‑induced hardening and cracking. - Practical implications: preheat, controlled interpass temperatures, low‑hydrogen consumables, and post‑weld heat treatment (PWHT) are normally required. For critical components, alternative joining methods (mechanical fastening or adhesive bonding in non‑load zones) or machining features designed to avoid welded joints are common. - Recommendation: avoid welding for load‑bearing, high‑fatigue, or bearing race surfaces whenever possible. If welding is unavoidable, consult welding procedure specifications and perform PWHT to restore ductility and reduce residual stresses.
6. Corrosion and Surface Protection
- Neither GCr15 nor GCr15Mo are stainless steels; they have limited corrosion resistance in wet or corrosive environments.
- Standard protection methods:
- Mechanical surface finishing (polishing, superfinishing) to minimize initiation sites for corrosion fatigue.
- Coatings: electroplating, thermal spray, physical vapor deposition (PVD) for wear/corrosion environments, and zinc galvanizing or painting for general corrosion protection.
- Surface carburizing or induction hardening is sometimes used for contact surfaces; these require process design to maintain core toughness.
- PREN formula is not applicable to these non‑stainless steels, but for clarity: $$\text{PREN} = \text{Cr} + 3.3 \times \text{Mo} + 16 \times \text{N}$$ This index is used for stainless grades to quantify pitting resistance; it does not meaningfully apply to high‑carbon bearing steels with only ~1–1.6% Cr.
7. Fabrication, Machinability, and Formability
- Machinability:
- In annealed condition (soft‑annealed), both steels are machinable; typical pre‑hardening hardness is kept low through spheroidization. GCr15Mo may be slightly less machinable if not fully spheroidized due to Mo‑stabilized carbides.
- After hardening, machinability is poor; grinding, hard turning, and superfinishing are the primary finishing operations.
- Formability:
- Cold forming is limited due to high carbon; hot forming or forging in appropriate temperature ranges is standard for producing blanks prior to final heat treatment.
- Surface finishing:
- Grinding and superfinishing are typical for bearing surfaces; GCr15Mo may require slightly different tempering/finishing cycles to achieve equivalent surface integrity because of its tempering response.
8. Typical Applications
| GCr15 (typical uses) | GCr15Mo (typical uses) |
|---|---|
| Deep groove ball bearings, roller bearings, bearing rings and balls for general industrial machinery | Heavy‑duty bearings (wind turbines, large industrial gearboxes), high‑fatigue bearings |
| Shafts, spindles, and hardened collars for machine tools and small rotating equipment | Bearings and components where higher hardenability or better tempering stability is required (thicker sections) |
| Small gears, precision shafts, and wear parts for moderate duty | Automotive driveline components and larger journals subject to cyclic contact stresses |
| Applications where cost sensitivity and wide availability are priorities | Applications where marginal performance improvement in fatigue life justifies slightly higher material cost |
Selection rationale: - Choose GCr15 when cost sensitivity, standard bearing sizes, and established heat‑treatment routes are the priority. - Choose GCr15Mo when larger cross sections, higher tempering temperatures, or slight improvements in rolling‑contact fatigue life justify the additional alloying cost.
9. Cost and Availability
- Cost: GCr15 is generally less expensive than GCr15Mo because it lacks deliberate molybdenum addition. Molybdenum is a higher‑cost alloying element and adds to material pricing.
- Availability: GCr15 is widely manufactured and stocked in common bearing product forms (bars, rings, preforms). GCr15Mo is widely available as well but may be produced to order for certain product forms or tighter chemistry controls.
- Product forms: Both grades are available as bars, rings, blanks, and forgings; lead times can increase for large or low‑volume items requiring custom chemistry or tighter inclusions control.
10. Summary and Recommendation
Summary table (qualitative):
| Characteristic | GCr15 | GCr15Mo |
|---|---|---|
| Weldability | Poor (high C, needs preheat/PWHT) | Slightly worse (higher CE due to Mo) |
| Strength–Toughness balance | High hardness achievable; good fatigue performance in standard parts | Similar or slightly improved fatigue and tempering resistance, especially in thicker sections |
| Cost | Lower | Higher (due to Mo) |
| Availability | Very good | Very good, sometimes more spec‑controlled |
Final recommendation: - Choose GCr15 if you need a well‑proven, cost‑effective bearing steel for standard-sized rolling elements and components where standard hardenability and fatigue performance suffice. - Choose GCr15Mo if the application involves thicker sections, higher tempering temperatures, larger bearings or components requiring improved tempering resistance and rolling‑contact fatigue life, or where consistent through‑hardening is critical and justifies modestly higher material cost.
Practical note: final material selection should always be validated with the specific component geometry, operating load spectrum, surface finish requirement, and the precise heat‑treatment cycle. Consult supplier material certificates and run application‑representative fatigue or endurance tests when life‑cycle performance is critical.