Bainite Controversy

Some of my colleagues including one Professor have noticed that my Blog has been covering controversial topics, including religion (Church abuse, Vatican criticises about human rights ), politics (Liberal Double Speak, Burlesconi Scandal) , football (England have to qualify after losing bid to host World Cup). All of these are topics my uncle told me I should never discuss.

The reason is I am building up controversy before discussing about displacive and diffusional bainite 😉

Advertisements

5 Responses

  1. Ah, the bainite controversy — the one that puts all other controversies to shame!

    We are all ears, now. We can’t wait any more. Bring it on. Riiiight Now!

  2. According to Borgenstram, Hillert and Agren (Acta 2009) the controversy about bainite is preventing the development of new steels because modern engineers have been exposed to mathematical models based on good theories.

    “As various types of bainitic steels are now receiving increased attention from industry through a new generation of engineers, it is becoming more urgent to resolve the controversy. The new engineers are familiar with mathematical modelling based on good theories and have high expectations. The bainite controversy is an obstacle for the further development of bainitic steels….”

    I am not really sure how this ‘controversial issue’ prevents the development of bainitic steels, models exist and it is possible to use them to design and develop new steels. A large number of novel steels have been developed by Bhadeshia and his coworkers in spite of the fact that they use models based on the displacive nature of bainite which others attempt to refute.

    • Engineers have been burned by “upper Bainite” being unintentionally formed by slack quenching. They confuse the desireable, lower Bainite, with its remarkable strength and toughness, with the poor properties of upper Bainite. Upper Bainite would be better described as isothermal lower pearlite. Lower Bainite has exceptional properties.

      • I think same problems would occur whatever the name. In fact I think if we call upper bainite as pearlite it will multiply the problems because you will have a chance to confuse the engineers who wanted a pearlitic microstructure also. It is also possible to form pearlite isothermally. Of course it would also further confuse the understanding of the transformation mechanism. I think the only answer to this problem is that engineers need to be more careful in their heat treatments.

  3. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: