IQMAL AIMAN BIN ISMAIL_2018261598

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MARA

FAKULTI KEJURUTERAAN MEKANIKAL
___________________________________________________________________________

Program : Bachelor of Engineering (Hons) Mechanical (EM220/EM221)

Course : Applied Mechanics Lab
Code : MEC 424
Lecturer : Dr Nik Rozlin Bt Nik Mohd. Masdek
Group : EMD4M8A M3 GROUP 3
___________________________________________________________________________

MEC 424 - LABORATORY REPORT

TITLE : The Jominy End-Quench Test

No NAME STUDENT ID SIGNATURE

1 Iqmal Aiman Bin Ismail 2018261598
2 Ir'Fan Iskandar Bin Ishak 2018435772
3 Lokman Hakimi Bin Rosli 2018226078
4 Megat a'Izzul Illmi Bin m Al-Muz-Zammil 2018238792
5 Mohammad Alif Hakimi Bin Ab Rahman 2018439118

LABORATORY SESSION : 11TH MAY2020

(DATE)

REPORT SUBMISSION : 7th JUNE 2020

(DATE)

*By signing above you attest that you have contributed to this submission and confirm that all work you have contributed to this
submission is your own work. Any suspicion of copying or plagiarism in this work will result in an investigation of academic
msconduct and may result in a “0” on the work, an “F” in the course, or possibly more severe penalties.

Marking Scheme

No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Total
 FACULTY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Teamwork Assessment Form

Name : IQMAL AIMAN BIN ISMAIL

Member’s Name 1 : IR'FAN ISKANDAR BIN ISHAK

2 : LOKMAN HAKIMI BIN ROSLI

3 : MEGAT A'IZZUL ILLMI BIN M AL-MUZ-ZAMMIL

4 : MOHAMMAD ALIF HAKIMI BIN AB RAHMAN

Scale 1 2 3 4 5
Level Poor Acceptable Excellent

You will rate yourself and your team’s member on the following criteria

Earned Assessment
Element Members
Self
1 2 3 4
I was ready to work with my team 5 5 5 5 5
I did my assigned work well and always on time 5 5 5 5 5
I was fair to my teammates and myself 5 5 5 5 5
I listened to others appreciatively and was supportive 5 5 5 5 5
I was very committed and focused in my team 4 5 4 4 5
I put extra efforts to finish or accomplish our task 4 4 5 5 5
I encouraged others in my team and was helpful 5 5 5 4 4
I managed and coordinated team efforts effectively 5 4 4 5 5
I was able to lead discussions and provide solutions 5 4 5 5 4
Overall, I was very satisfied and enjoyed my work 5 5 5 5 5
Total 48 48 48 48 48

Comment

Self:

Member 1: Ir’fan did his part on time without much problem.

Member 2: Lokman always ask for oppinion when he is stuck with something.

Member 3: Megat completes his part efficiently.

Member 4: Alif could explain the jominy end quench test properly.

2
 FACULTY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Teamwork Assessment Form

Name : IR'FAN ISKANDAR BIN ISHAK (2018435772)

Member’s Name 1 : IQMAL AIMAN BIN ISMAIL (2018261598)

2 : LOKMAN HAKIMI BIN ROSLI (2018226078)

3 : MEGAT A'IZZUL ILLMI BIN M AL-MUZ-ZAMMIL(2018238792)

4 : MOHAMMAD ALIF HAKIMI BIN AB RAHMAN (2018439118)

Scale 1 2 3 4 5
Level Poor Acceptable Excellent

You will rate yourself and your team’s member on the following criteria

Earned Assessment
Element Members
Self
1 2 3 4
I was ready to work with my team 5 5 5 5 5
I did my assigned work well and always on time 5 5 5 5 5
I was fair to my teammates and myself 5 5 5 5 5
I listened to others appreciatively and was supportive 5 5 5 5 5
I was very committed and focused in my team 5 5 5 5 5
I put extra efforts to finish or accomplish our task 5 5 5 5 5
I encouraged others in my team and was helpful 5 5 5 5 5
I managed and coordinated team efforts effectively 5 5 5 5 5
I was able to lead discussions and provide solutions 5 5 5 5 5
Overall, I was very satisfied and enjoyed my work 5 5 5 5 5
Total 50 50 50 50 50

Comment

Self: Clearly know what to do and giving a full commitment on this lab report

Member 1: Clearly know what to do and giving a full commitment on this lab report

Member 2: Clearly know what to do and giving a full commitment on this lab report

Member 3: Clearly know what to do and giving a full commitment on this lab report

Member 4: Clearly know what to do and giving a full commitment on this lab report

3
 FACULTY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Teamwork Assessment Form

Name : MEGAT A'IZZUL ILLMI BIN M AL-MUZ-ZAMMIL

Member’s Name 1 : IR'FAN ISKANDAR BIN ISHAK

2 : LOKMAN HAKIMI BIN ROSLI

3 : IQMAL AIMAN BIN ISMAIL

4 : MOHAMMAD ALIF HAKIMI BIN AB RAHMAN

Scale 1 2 3 4 5
Level Poor Acceptable Excellent

You will rate yourself and your team’s member on the following criteria

Earned Assessment
Element Members
Self
1 2 3 4
I was ready to work with my team 5 5 5 5 5
I did my assigned work well and always on time 5 5 5 5 5
I was fair to my teammates and myself 5 5 5 5 5
I listened to others appreciatively and was supportive 5 5 5 5 5
I was very committed and focused in my team 5 5 5 5 5
I put extra efforts to finish or accomplish our task 5 5 5 5 5
I encouraged others in my team and was helpful 5 5 5 5 5
I managed and coordinated team efforts effectively 5 5 5 5 5
I was able to lead discussions and provide solutions 5 5 5 5 5
Overall, I was very satisfied and enjoyed my work 5 5 5 5 5
Total 50 50 50 50 50

Comment

Self: Good work, make sure to understand theoretical knowledge.

Member 1: Good job, punctual work and a great help to the team.
Member 2: Good job, punctual work and a great help to the team.
Member 3: Good job, punctual work and a great help to the team.
Member 4: Good job, punctual work and a great help to the team.

4
 FACULTY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Teamwork Assessment Form

Name : LOKMAN HAKIMI BIN ROSLI

Member’s Name 1 : IR'FAN ISKANDAR BIN ISHAK

2 : MOHAMMAD ALIF HAKIMI BIN AB RAHMAN

3 : MEGAT A'IZZUL ILLMI BIN M AL-MUZ-ZAMMIL

4 : IQMAL AIMAN BIN ISMAIL

Scale 1 2 3 4 5
Level Poor Acceptable Excellent

You will rate yourself and your team’s member on the following criteria

Earned Assessment
Element Members
Self
1 2 3 4
I was ready to work with my team 5 5 5 5 5
I did my assigned work well and always on time 5 5 5 5 5
I was fair to my teammates and myself 5 5 5 5 5
I listened to others appreciatively and was supportive 5 5 5 5 5
I was very committed and focused in my team 4 5 5 5 5
I put extra efforts to finish or accomplish our task 5 4 5 5 5
I encouraged others in my team and was helpful 5 5 4 5 5
I managed and coordinated team efforts effectively 5 5 5 4 5
I was able to lead discussions and provide solutions 5 5 5 5 4
Overall, I was very satisfied and enjoyed my work 5 5 5 5 5
Total 49 49 49 49 49

Comment

Self: Improve in explanation.

Member 1: Excellent work, always looks for ways to be helpful in the group members.

Member 2: An enthusiastic member of the class and shows willingness to learn.

Member 3: Frequently among the first to help and mentor other group members

Member 4: Shows responsible behavior, works well with a group and shows appreciation for the efforts

5
 FACULTY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

Teamwork Assessment Form

Name : MOHAMMAD ALIF HAKIMI BIN AB RAHMAN

Member’s Name 1 : IR'FAN ISKANDAR BIN ISHAK

2 : LOKMAN HAKIMI BIN ROSLI

3 : MEGAT A'IZZUL ILLMI BIN M AL-MUZ-ZAMMIL

4 : IQMAL AIMAN BIN ISMAIL

Scale 1 2 3 4 5
Level Poor Acceptable Excellent

You will rate yourself and your team’s member on the following criteria

Earned Assessment
Element Members
Self
1 2 3 4
I was ready to work with my team 5 5 5 5 5
I did my assigned work well and always on time 5 5 5 5 5
I was fair to my teammates and myself 5 5 5 5 5
I listened to others appreciatively and was supportive 5 5 5 5 5
I was very committed and focused in my team 5 5 5 5 5
I put extra efforts to finish or accomplish our task 5 5 5 5 5
I encouraged others in my team and was helpful 5 5 5 5 5
I managed and coordinated team efforts effectively 5 5 5 5 5
I was able to lead discussions and provide solutions 4 4 4 4 4
Overall, I was very satisfied and enjoyed my work 5 5 5 5 5
Total 49 49 49 49 49

Comment

Self: Improve in explanation.

Member 1: Excellent work.

Member 2: Excellent work.

Member 3: Excellent work.

Member 4: Excellent work.

1. ABSTRACT
6
 In this experiment, we were used the jominy end quench test to determining the
hardenability of a material. The specimen was used to transformed entirely into a single solid
phase through heating to high temperature and then we were quenched by exposing one of its
ends to cooling process. The sample area that in contact with cooling source will drops in
temperature more rapidly, so limits growth in this material’s grains. Other sample, the surface
area cool ore slowly which is allow the grains to grow greater sizes. Based on the results, the
samples containing many different solid phases, each phase containing their different to the
hardness. Hardness reading was taken from this experiment based on reading of distance (mm)
and hardness vickers (HV) to establish the effect of changing temperature after heat treatment.
From the result we were able to determine the material’s characteristic and behaviour. At the
end of experiment the jominy end quench test, we can conclude the effects of the heat
treatment followed by different rates of cooling.

Figure 1.1

Table of Contents
1. ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................................................7

7
2. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................................10
Hardenability.........................................................................................................................................................10
Jominy End-Quench Test......................................................................................................................................10
3. THEORY..........................................................................................................................................................12
4. PROCEDURES................................................................................................................................................14
Materials................................................................................................................................................................14
Apparatus...............................................................................................................................................................14
Procedures.............................................................................................................................................................15
5. RESULTS.........................................................................................................................................................17
6. DISCUSSION...................................................................................................................................................31
7. CONCLUSION................................................................................................................................................37
8. REFERENCES.................................................................................................................................................42

8
 List of tables

Table of materials used...........................................................................................................................14

Table of apparatus used..........................................................................................................................14
Table of Reading of Distance (mm) against Hardness Vickers (HV).....................................................17
Table of Microstructure of Jominy-end quench under optical microscope.............................................19
Table of Reading of Distance (mm) against Hardness Vickers (HV).....................................................24
Table of Microstructures of the the jominy end quench specimen under the optical microscope...........26
Table of Reading of Distance (mm) against Hardness Vickers (HV).....................................................28
Table of specimens observation and sketches.........................................................................................29
Table of Reading of Distance (mm) against Hardness Vickers (HV).....................................................31
Table of Microstructure of specimen......................................................................................................32

9
 2. INTRODUCTION
The Jominy end-quench test is a test that have to be conducted in order to measure the
hardenability of a steel. It is the process where the capacity of the steel to be harden in depth
under certain given conditions is measured.
The knowledge about this process is important as it is necessary to select the right
combination of alloy elements and heat treatment to minimalize the stresses linked to the
thermal stresses and distortion in industrial manufacturing components. This Jominy end-
quench test is the common method used to determine the hardenability of any steels. Steels can
be hardened in depth by quenching. The hardenability of steels, depends on the chemical
composition. This composition may affect the austenizing temperature and so on.
Other than that, this test was also used to determine the either the information from this
test can be used to understand whether it affect the steel or alloying steel’s microstructure.

Hardenability
Basically, hardenability is the ability that run inside the steel system which allowing the
steel to partially or to completely transform from austenite, to some fraction of martensite at a
given depth under a given high temperature conditions.
Some quench and temper-heat process are to be done in order to harden the steel. To
select which steel that will be treat heated, it is important to know its hardenability. Steels with
high hardenability are needed for large high strength component while steels with low
hardenability may be used for smaller components.

Jominy End-Quench Test

The steel will be normalized to eliminate the uncertainty of the microstructure from
previous experiment before austenizing it. The temperature is normally between 800℃ to
900℃. The test sample is quickly transferred to the test machine, where it is held vertically and
sprayed with a controlled flow of water onto one end of the sample. This cools the specimen
from one end, simulating the effect of quenching a larger steel component in water
The specimen is a cylinder which having a certain length and a certain diameter. The
sample may look like the figure below:

Figure 2.1

10
The Jominy test machine may look like the figure below:

Figure 2.2

The further process of this test will be explained in the procedure parts on this lab report.

11
 3. THEORY
When talking about hardness of a material, it is often related to the Jominy-end test.
Jominy-end quench test is the test that are most often used to measure the hardenability of a
material. So what is hardenability? Hardenability is the process at which a material undergoes
heat treatment to adjust the hardness level. It also shows the capability of a material to form
martensite from austenite. The material used in this experiment is low carbon steel. The
Jominy-end test is done by first, heating the material up to below the melting point (900°C),
and then only the bottom part of the heated low carbon steel will be submerged into water in
order to differentiate the hardness of the low carbon steel. The submerged end of the low
carbon steel that is in contact with water will form the most martensite while the other end will
have pearlite and ferrite as the microstructure. The hardness will be measured by using a
Hardness Vickers (HV) against the distance from the submerged end to the other end. The
hardness Vickers was developed by Robert L. Smith and George E. in 1921 at Vickers Ltd as
an alternative to the Brinell method in order to measure the hardness of a material. The formula
to calculate the Hardness Vickers is

HV = 1.854(F/d2),
Where F = the applied load (kilogram-force)
And d2 = area of the indentation (mm2)
Generally, the hardness of the material can be represented similar to the figure below :

Figure 3.1 Hardness Vickers HV vs Distance

As can be seen from the figure above, the hardness a quenched material will be highest at the
nearest distance to the quenching source. As the distance increase, the hardness will decrease.
This shows that the relationship between hardness of material and distance from quenching is
inversely proportional.

12
There are several factors that also affect the formation of martensite during the quenching for
low carbon steel. One of them is the percentage of carbon in the low carbon steel. The higher
the percentage of carbon, the formation of martensite will become lower and mixed with
austenite microstructure. The figure below shows the relationship of hardness and the carbon
content of a material.

Figure 3.2 Formation of martensite on different carbon % material.

Another factor that also affect the formation of martensite is the thickness of material. The
thicker the material, the longer time it will take for martensite to form towards the core of the
material. If the material is too thick, martensite will not form around the core of the material.

Figure 3.3 The relationship between cooling curve of surface and core of a quenched material.

As can be seen in the figure above, the time taken for martensite to form is much faster as
compared to the formation of martensite on the core of the material. This is because the surface
is cooled down much faster than the core, thus resulting in the formation of martensite first.
13
 4. PROCEDURES
Materials
Table of materials used

Material Function

Act as specimen

Low Carbon Steel

Use for rapid cooling (Quenching)

Water

Apparatus
Table of apparatus used

Apparatus Function

To heat and drop the specimen.

Jominy End Quench Furnace

To observe the hardness of the specimen.

Vickers Hardness Testing Machine

14
 To observe the microstructures of specimen

Optical Microscope

Procedures
4.1 Sample Preparation

1. A cylindrical low carbon steel was prepared for jominy end-quench test.
2. Temperature of furnace was set at melting point of low carbon steel which is 900° C.
3. The specimen was put and then heated in the Jominy End Quench Furnace until the
temperature reaches the melting point.
4. Water at the jominy sink was turned on and water flow was adjusted until the height
reaches approximately 65mm (2 ½”) at Jominy End-Quench test bench. Rapid cooling
was happened at the bottom of the specimen when the test specimen is initially placed
on the fixture as shown in the figure 1.
5. The safety pin from the furnace was pull out so that the specimens fall down to the

Figure 4.1: Water flow when the

specimen was placed in the fixture.
quenching apparatus unit.
6. water was applied at the bottom of the specimen. For this step, precaution should be
taken so that the water strikes only the bottom of the specimen.
7. The specimen was left in the quenching apparatus unit until it cools down to room
temperature.
8. The specimen was removed from the quenching apparatus and a flat on the side of the
specimen was grinded for hardness test and microstructure evaluation using optical
microscope.

4.2 Vickers Hardness Test

15
 1. Jominy end quench specimen as shown in Figure 3 was taken to the material laboratory
for hardness test using the Vickers Hardness Testing Machine.

Figure 4.2: Sample specimen

2. Vickers hardness (1kg) readings were taken at 1 mm intervals for the first 10 mm, 5
mm intervals for the next 40 mm and 10mm intervals for the remaining 50 mm length
of the specimen.
3. Data for Vickers hardness was recorded.
4. Graph for hardenability curve of for Vickers Hardness versus Distance from quenched
end was plotted using graph paper or computer structure.
5. Microstructure of specimen that been observe under optical microscope were sketched
on the paper.

5. RESULTS
RESULT
Table of Reading of Distance (mm) against Hardness Vickers (HV)

Distance Diameter 1 Diameter 2 Average

HV
mm µm µm µm

0 61.8 62.2 62 492.4

1 62 63.8 62.9 487.1

16
 2 63.7 66.6 65.15 481.7

3 79.2 80.6 79.9 478.4

4 83.2 84.9 84.05 472.3

5 83.6 81.9 82.75 450.7

6 86 80.4 83.2 437.2

7 90.1 85.9 88 412.5

8 92.9 96.5 94.7 376.7

9 99.6 101.8 100.7 342.2

10 86.5 92.3 89.4 318.9

15 98.9 99 98.95 249.4

20 99.7 99.9 99.8 196.2

25 101.2 107.4 104.3 170.5

30 110.6 112.2 111.4 160.3

35 107.6 107.6 107.6 149.4

40 112.5 113.5 113 145.2

45 114 111.9 112.95 140.4

50 115.7 116.5 116.1 137.6

60 106.3 106.3 106.3 134

70 87.1 87.5 87.3 126.3

80 104.8 104.8 104.8 118.9

90 102.6 102.6 102.6 116.1

100 112.4 108.4 110.4 112.2

From the result and data obtained for the hardness and distance of the Jominy-end quench test,
a graph representing the relationship of the hardness vickers and distance can be plotted. Below
is the graph plotted.

17
 Graph of Hardness Vickers vs Distance (mm)

Figure 6.1 shows the relationship of hardness vickers against distance. The more distance
measure from the quenched end, the lower the hardness becomes.

18
 Table of Microstructure of Jominy-end quench under optical microscope

Under optical microscope Sketch

Specimen 1 Sketch of specimen 1

Specimen 2 Sketch of specimen 2

Specimen 3 Sketch of specimen 3

19
Specimen 4 Sketch of specimen 4

Specimen 5 Sketch of specimen 5

Specimen 6 Sketch of specimen 6

20
IR’FAN ISKANDAR BIN ISHAK_2018435772

RESULT
Table of Reading of Distance (mm) against Hardness Vickers (HV)
Distance Diameter 1 Diameter 2 Average
HV
mm µm µm µm
0 61.8 62.2 62 492.4
1 62 63.8 62.9 487.1
2 63.7 66.6 65.15 481.7
3 79.2 80.6 79.9 478.4
4 83.2 84.9 84.05 472.3
5 83.6 81.9 82.75 450.7
6 86 80.4 83.2 437.2
7 90.1 85.9 88 412.5
8 92.9 96.5 94.7 376.7
9 99.6 101.8 100.7 342.2
10 86.5 92.3 89.4 318.9
15 98.9 99 98.95 249.4
20 99.7 99.9 99.8 196.2
25 101.2 107.4 104.3 170.5
30 110.6 112.2 111.4 160.3
35 107.6 107.6 107.6 149.4
40 112.5 113.5 113 145.2
45 114 111.9 112.95 140.4
50 115.7 116.5 116.1 137.6
60 106.3 106.3 106.3 134
70 87.1 87.5 87.3 126.3
80 104.8 104.8 104.8 118.9
90 102.6 102.6 102.6 116.1
100 112.4 108.4 110.4 112.2

Specimen Sample Result Sketch of Sample result

21
IR’FAN ISKANDAR BIN ISHAK_2018435772

22
IR’FAN ISKANDAR BIN ISHAK_2018435772

Graph of Hardness against distance from quenched end.

23
LOKMAN HAKIMI BIN ROSLI _2018226078
RESULT
Table of Reading of Distance (mm) against Hardness Vickers (HV)

Distance Diameter 1 Diameter 2 Average

HV
mm µm µm µm

0 61.8 62.2 62 492.4

1 62 63.8 62.9 487.1

2 63.7 66.6 65.15 481.7

3 79.2 80.6 79.9 478.4

4 83.2 84.9 84.05 472.3

5 83.6 81.9 82.75 450.7

6 86 80.4 83.2 437.2

7 90.1 85.9 88 412.5

8 92.9 96.5 94.7 376.7

9 99.6 101.8 100.7 342.2

10 86.5 92.3 89.4 318.9

15 98.9 99 98.95 249.4

20 99.7 99.9 99.8 196.2

25 101.2 107.4 104.3 170.5

30 110.6 112.2 111.4 160.3

35 107.6 107.6 107.6 149.4

40 112.5 113.5 113 145.2

45 114 111.9 112.95 140.4

50 115.7 116.5 116.1 137.6

60 106.3 106.3 106.3 134

70 87.1 87.5 87.3 126.3

80 104.8 104.8 104.8 118.9

90 102.6 102.6 102.6 116.1

100 112.4 108.4 110.4 112.2

24
LOKMAN HAKIMI BIN ROSLI _2018226078
The graph shows the result and data obtained for the hardness and distance of the Jominy-end
quench test which is representing the relationship of the hardness vickers and distance.

Graph Reading of Distance (mm) against Hardness Vickers (HV)

600

500
Hardness Vickers (HV)

400

300 HV

200

100

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Distance (mm)

Graph Reading of Distance (mm) against Hardness Vickers (HV)

The graph shows the relationship between hardness vickers and distance. The more distance
measured from the quenched end, the lower the hardness.

25
LOKMAN HAKIMI BIN ROSLI _2018226078
Table of Microstructures of the the jominy end quench specimen under the optical microscope

Specimen under the optical microscope Sketch

Specimen 1 Sketch Specimen 1

Specimen 2 Sketch Specimen 2

Specimen 3 Sketch Specimen 3

26
LOKMAN HAKIMI BIN ROSLI _2018226078

Specimen 4 Sketch Specimen 4

Specimen 5 Sketch Specimen 5

Specimen 6
Sketch Specimen 6

27
MEGAT A'IZZUL ILLMI BIN M AL-MUZ-ZAMMIL_2018238792

RESULT

Table of Reading of Distance (mm) against Hardness Vickers (HV)

28
MEGAT A'IZZUL ILLMI BIN M AL-MUZ-ZAMMIL_2018238792

Hardness Vickers,HV VS Distance from quenched end,mm

600

500

400
Hardness Vickers,HV

300

200

100

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Distance from quenched end,mm

Graph of Reading of Distance (mm) Against Hardness Vickers (HV)

The graph indicates the relationship between the distance (mm) and the Hardness
Vickers (HV). The graph clearly shows that the Hardness Vickers drops rapidly until 20 mm
from the quenched end and then continues to steadily drop until 100 mm.

Table of specimens observation and sketches

Specimens as Observed Under Microscope Sketches of Specimens

Specimen 1

Specimen 2

29
MEGAT A'IZZUL ILLMI BIN M AL-MUZ-ZAMMIL_2018238792

Specimen 3

Specimen 4

Specimen 5

Specimen 6

30
MOHAMMAD ALIF HAKIMI BIN AB RAHMAN_2018439118

RESULT
Table of Reading of Distance (mm) against Hardness Vickers (HV)

Hardness Vickers,HV VS Distance from quenched end,mm

600

500
Hardness Vickers,HV

400

300

200

100

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Distance from quenched end,mm

Graph of Hardness Vickers against Distance from quenched end

31
MOHAMMAD ALIF HAKIMI BIN AB RAHMAN_2018439118

Table of Microstructure of specimen

Specimen Result
1

32
IQMAL AIMAN BIN ISMAIL_2018261598

6. DISCUSSION
Heat treatment that are done to strengthen a material to harden is so much more than
just submerging a hot metal into a cool fluid. There are several things that can be observed
through this method and that’s where the Jominy-end quench test is good at. The Jominy-end
test is capable of determining the rate of hardness of a material. It can also to an extent,
speculate the trend of hardenability of a material with the distance of the material from the
source of quenching. This experiment was done by heating a low carbon steel up to it’s
austenite temperature (around 800°C to 900°C) and then one end is submerged into water
while the other end was let to cool in air (normalizing). Then, the microstructure of 6 different
specimen that are taken at different length of the material from the source of quenching are
observed under the optical microscope. For each specimen, the number from 1 to 6 means that
the specimen was taken from the segment of material that undergoes jominy-end quenching
from the closest to the farthest respectively. This means that specimen 1 is the at one end that is
submerged with water and specimen 6 is cooled down with air and is located the farthest from
the quenched end.
For specimen 1, the location is at the end of the low carbon steel submerged with water.
The hot low carbon steel that was heated up to austenite region was rapidly cooled by the water
and thus causing it to form martensite at a fast rate. The microstructure of specimen 1 shows
that the formation of martensite occupies almost all of the specimen. Only a little portion of
bainite can be observed on this specimen. It can be observed that the hardness of this specimen
is the highest among all 6 specimens.
Specimen 2 is located on the segment right after specimen 1, it is also close to the
quenched part of the low carbon steel however this part is not submerged with water. Heat
transfer from a hot body to a cool body, and this also applies here. As the heat from specimen
one are transfered to the cool water, heat from specimen 2 are also transfered to specimen 1 as
it cools down. As a result, specimen 2 also undergoes fast cooling and thus forming martensite
and bainite in its microstructure, albeit the formation of martensite is less and more formation
of bainite is observed as compared to specimen 1,
Specimen 3 is located near the middle part of the low carbon steel. At this segment, the
microstructure observed is made up of mostly bainite and only a small portion consist of

33
IQMAL AIMAN BIN ISMAIL_2018261598

martensite. The hardness of this segment is somewhat lacking because martensite formation is
what indicates the hardness of a material.
Specimen 4 is the next segment. At this segment, the microstructure is very different
from the last 3 segments. Pearlite starts to form on the microstructure of this segment. The
formation of pearlite takes over the martensite . Although pearlite can be considered as a tough
formation, it is not necessarily hard like martensite.
The microstructure of Specimen 5 consists of bainite, pearlite and also ferrite. This
formation is cause due to the distance from the source of cooling in the Jominy-end test. The
formation of ferrite and pearlite is called the lamellar structure. The alternating layers of ferrite
and pearlite.
Specimen 6 is located at the segment farthest away from the quenched end. At this
segment, the microstructure can be observed to be only made up of pearlite and fine ferrite.
This formation could only occur when the material undergoes a slow cooling process. This is
true as the low carbon steel undergoes normalizing and does not come into contact with other
substance that would help to speed up the cooling process.
Based on the graph that was formed by the tabulation of data obtained, it was observed
that the harness of the low carbon steel becomes less the longer the distance it is from the
source of quenching. When it is compared to the microstructure that was observed through the
optical microscope, this was proven to be correct. This is because the hardness of material is
determined by the formation of martensite. As the specimen goes further away from the source
of quenching, the formation of martensite slowly reduces and finally there are no formation of
martensite. Thus, the experimental result and the expected theoretical result is proven to be
correct.
.

34
IR’FAN ISKANDAR BIN ISHAK_2018435772

DISCUSSION

The graph of hardenability curve between the Hardness Vickers (HV) versus the distance from
quenched end is showing that it is inversely proportional where when the distance from
quenched end increase, the Hardness Vickers (HV) will be decreasing. This was affected by the
cooling rate of the sample or specimen that decrease from the quenched end.

SPECIMEN 1
It was having a lot of martensite (needle-like) in its microstructure. It is due to the specimen
which was being quenched directly to water which resulting its to have a highest cooling rate.
The amount of martensite is directly proportional to the hardness of the sample so that when
the martensite’s amount is high, the sample will become harder. The martensite is hard and
brittle.

SPECIMEN 2
It was having lower cooling rate compare to specimen 1 so this will resulting the sample to
have less amount of martensite. The pearlite will form at this lower cooling rate. We can see
that the needle-like structure which is martensite is lower than the specimen 1 while we can
also observe there is some pealite on the sample. Specimen 2 has lower hardenability compare
to specimen 1.

SPECIMEN 3
It was having some slightly identical rate as specimen 2. Eventually, for this specimen, the
amount of martensite was reduce and the pearlite has increase its number. The higher amount
of pearlite has made this specimen having a lower hardenability compare to specimen 1 and 2.

SPECIMEN 4
It was having more pearlite while the martensite was started to vanish (only small amount left).
The pearlite that has been produced is fine pearlite which is having high hardenability compare
to coarse pearlite. The absence of the martensite is causing the sample to have lower
hardenability compare to specimen 3.

SPECIMEN 5
It was having coarse pearlite which means that this specimen is less hard compare to specimen
4.

SPECIMEN 6
It was having the lowest cooling rate and the lowest hardenability which caused by the absence
of the martensite and it has the farthest distance from quenched end.

There might be some errors occur during the experiment which probably are:
- The flow of the water that might be inconsistent as the gravity force may drag the water
to downward.
- The lag during the quenched process that may lead to the inconsistency of the result of
this Jominy end quench test. As that short time of lag may causing the sample to be
quenched by the air.

35
LOKMAN HAKIMI BIN ROSLI _2018226078

DISCUSSION
In this experiment, we were used The Jominy-end test which is to determined the rate
of hardness of a material of specimens. Quenching treatment on specimens to justify the
hardenability of material. Other alternative method, to develop a more convenient standard test
method which is to compared of hardenability and the jominy end quench test was the method
in this experiment. From the jominy end quench test result, we gained the information to
selecting the proper combination of alloy steel and heat treatment to minimize thermal stress
and distortion when manufacturing components of various sizes. Besides, hardenability was
measured of the capacity of steel to hardened in depth when quenched from its austenitizing
temperature. The experiment was done, a sample of steel is normalized to eliminate differences
in microstructure due to previous forging and then it was austenitised (800 to 900 oC). Next
specimen was rapidly transferred to the test machine, where the specimen drop to water
controlled flow onto one end of the specimen and the specimen was cooled at the end, the
effect of quenching a larger component in water. Then the specimen was ground flat along its
length to depth to remove decarburized material and the hardness was measured at intervals
along its length beginning at the quenched end to the end of specimen.

For specimen 1, we can see the result was martensite and bainate. At the beginning
quenched end where it was submerged with water shows martensite and bainate. The low
carbon steel was heated up to austenite region and rapidly cooled by water that causing to form
martensite at fast rate. Next specimen 2 was located after specimen 1, it is closed to quenched
part where the carbon steel was rapid cooling and this specimen not submerged with water.
Based on first law of thermodynamic the heat was transferred to hot body to cool body.
Besides, this specimen was undergoes fast cooling to just like specimen 1 and form martensite
and bainate microstructure but martensite was decrease and bainate was increase compared to
specimen 1. Then specimen 3 was located after specimen 2, it was near at the middle of the
carbon steel. From the result under the optical microscope we can see the bainate and a little of
area martensite. Besides we know that the martensite formation affect the hardness of this
specimen and the hardness was low compared to specimen 1 and 2. After that specimen 4, that
was at next segment which is different to others microstructure. From the result we can see the
pearlite start appear and martensite was decrease. As we know pearlite is tougher than
martensite. Next is specimen 5, this specimen was consist bainite, ferrite and pearlite
microstructures. The microstructures appear because of the distance from the source of cooling
in jominy end test. As we know the formation of ferrite and pearlite is lamellar structure. Lastly
specimen 6 was located at the last from the beginning quenched end test. The microstructure
that was appear was pearlite and fine ferrite. This is because of the material undergoes slow
cooling process and the carbon steel does not in contact to other substance so it will affect the
cooling process.

Based on the graph that we had created, the graph show that the hardness of the low
carbon steel becomes less against the distance from the area of quenching. From the result, the
microstructures show the hardness of material was determined by the formation of martensite.
As we can see, the martensite slowly gone from the quenching area to last of carbon steel and
no martensite appear.

36
MEGAT A'IZZUL ILLMI BIN M AL-MUZ-ZAMMIL_2018238792

DISCUSSION

The Jominy End Quench Test is a test where one end of a steel bar is rapidly cooled
with water. This test is used to determine the hardenability of the steel. Hardenability means
the ability of steel to form martensite. Martensite is formed when austenite is cooled down at a
very fast rate. The carbon does not have any time to diffuse due to the fast cooling and
therefore is trapped inside martensite’s crystalline structure. Specimen 1 is the end that is
directly cooled with water. This end has had a very fast cooling rate therefore forming
martensite. We can identify martensite by its needle-like crystal structure.

The second specimen is the area above Specimen 1 This specimen did not have direct
contact with the water therefore the cooling rate is a bit slower than Specimen 1. This can be
identified by the enlarging grains. The structure is still somewhat needle-like however the
needles are larger and broader. This is caused because the carbon atoms have more time to
diffuse. This is upper bainite. Bainite is formed when austenite is cooled down slower than
needed to form martensite. Upper bainite means bainite formed at a higher temperature
compared to lower bainite.

Specimen 3 is lower bainite. Specimen 4 is a mixture of ferrite and pearlite. There is no

more crystal-like structure. The carbon has had plenty of time to diffuse because of the slow
cooling rate. The lighter etchings are ferrite whereas the darker etchings are pearlite. Specimen
5 is the same as Specimen 4. Specimen 6 has clearer lamellar structures. These lamellar
structures can be identified as pearlite.

37
MOHAMMAD ALIF HAKIMI BIN AB RAHMAN_2018439118

DISCUSSION
Jominy end-quenched test is to measure hardenability various of heat treatment. hardenability
can be obtained by undergo varies of heat treatment which is annealing, normalizing, and
quenching. In this experiment, specimen was heated at 900° C to form 100% austenite and
cooled by water and air temperature which is quenching process and normalizing process.
Quenching process happens at the end of the specimen due to cooled rapidly by water while the
distance further away from end of specimen undergo normalizing process due to cooled by air
temperature. The cooling rate was highest at the end of the specimen. For this part, more
martensite was formed and this part will be harder and stronger than any others part due to
martensite properties. The part with lower cooling rate allows the austenite to form into
structure like martensite or pearlite.

The hardness (HV) of the low carbon steel with varies distance from quench end was
determined by using Vickers Hardness Testing Machine. The readings were taken and a graph
hardenability curve of Vickers Hardness against distance from quenched end was plotted. From
the readings obtained, it was found that the highest hardness of 492.4 HV at 0 mm from the
quenched end. This show that there was more martensite form at this distance. Meanwhile the
lowest hardness at 112.2 HV at 100 mm from quenched end. This show that there were more
pearlite and less martensite form at this distance. Based on the graph, it shows that the amount
of martensite increases as the distance of quenched end decrease. This is due to difference in
exposure to cooling by water which vary the cooling rate that determine amount of martensite
and pearlite formed. The quenched which has highest cooling rate has the highest hardness.

As the specimen drop to quenching apparatus in form of austenite, the quenched end is
rapidly cooled by water and form martensite like microstructure on specimen 1. Martensite is
formed when austenite is rapidly cooled. For the next specimen, the concentration of
martensite decrease due to cooling rate. The opposite end, specimen 6 which is furthest away
from the quenched end is ferrite and pearlite. The specimen between of two end which is
specimen 2, specimen 3, specimen 4 and specimen 5 formed martensite, ferrite and pearlite
depends on the cooling rate. More martensite formed when cooling rate is fast while more
ferrite and pearlite form when the cooling rate is slower. Our result is same with theory, so
there is no error was found but precautions should be taking a good care. Maybe some of the
readings obtained was not accurate. This can be improved by taking a few readings on the
grinded surface at several lanes along the specimen in order to obtain correct set of readings.
Heat treatment had been applied in industry in making sword, padlock and many more. The
material that had been use will be heated until reach melting point and shape will be formed.
Implication of this heat treatment to make a material harder and easier to shape.

38
IQMAL AIMAN BIN ISMAIL_2018261598

7. CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION

Through the Jominy-end quench test, there are several things that could be taken into
account for its importance. First, the distance of material from the source of quenching will
affect the rate of formation for martensite as well as the hardness of material. The closer the
metal is to the quenching source, the harder it becomes. Second, the thickness of the material
also plays an important role in determining the hardness of the material. If a material is too
thick, only the outer surface will undergoes hardening while the core will remain soft. Third, in
industries, the Jominy-end quench are done by submerging the whole body of the material into
the cooling reagent instead of just one end. This is done to ensure and even hardness and
martensite forming on the whole body. This is also one of the way to ensure the quality of the
product. Jominy-end quench test is a very good method to determine the hardness of material,
this can be done easily because the material required is not costly and can be easily obtained.
Also, by knowing what formation of microstructure that a material will produce under given
condition allows the manufacturer to control the outcome as desired. For example if a
manufacturer requires a hard material, the material should all be quenched and if the
manufacturer requires a softer material, then the material should be cooled down naturally
using air without exposing it to other coolant

39
IR’FAN ISKANDAR BIN ISHAK_2018435772

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, at the end of this experiment we are able to understand the relation
between hardness to the cooling rate of the specimen after been heated (quenching) using the
Jominy test method. We can identify the process needed to know how the quenching process
can show the properties of the steel. Also, we are able to understand microstructure changes to
the cooling rate of the specimen after been heated (quenching) using the Jominy test method as
we can see the result shown in the table of the sample. We can actually identify the state of
metal in this experiment as it is shown on the diagram of the samples that have been observed
under microscope.

40
LOKMAN HAKIMI BIN ROSLI _2018226078

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we were able to understand the relation between hardness to the cooling
rate of the specimen after being heated (quenching) using the Jominy test method. When the
hardness decrease, the distance is increase from the quenched area. Besides, we can elaborated
microstructure changes due to different cooling rate of the specimen after being heated
(quenching) using the Jominy test method. The microstructures in this low carbon steel of
martensite slowly done and no martensite appear at the end of this experiment.

41
MEGAT A'IZZUL ILLMI BIN M AL-MUZ-ZAMMIL_2018238792

CONCLUSION

The experiment can be concluded as a success. The graph clearly showed that the end
further away from the quenched end had a lower hardness. This is of course due to the slower
cooling rate. The slower cooling rate does not form martensite thus the lower hardness. The
change in microstructure was also clearly shown. Specimen one which was closest to the
quenched end clearly showed the martensite structure. the further away it got, the more the
lighter etchings expanded. This was caused by the diffusion of carbon which was allowed
because of the slower cooling rate. With Specimen 6, the structure clearly showed the structure
of pearlite which is understandable because it had the slowest cooling rate.

42
MOHAMMAD ALIF HAKIMI BIN AB RAHMAN_2018439118

CONCLUSION

After conducting the experiment, it can be concluded that the hardness of the low carbon
steel increases as the distance from quenched end decrease due to the high cooling rate at the
quenched end. Jominy test describes the hardenability of a metal by undergo heat treatment.
Concentration of the martensite will determine the hardness of the metal. To obtain a metal
with high hardness, quenching process need to be applied. This experiment has been applied in
many industries in making a product. This process makes a product easy to shape and has a
high hardenability. This experiment can inspire student to figure out more about the process
and its microstructure.

43
 8. REFERENCES
1. Marrow, Thomas. (2001). Understanding the Jominy End Quench Test. Industrial Heating.
pg 57-60.
2. Newkirk, Joseph & Mackenzie, D.. (1998). The Jominy End Quench for Light-Weight Alloy
Development.
3. Y. Murakami, K. Matsuda, “Analysis of Vickers Hardness by the Finite Element Method”
December 1, 1994, J. Appl. Mech. Dec 1994, 61(4): 822-828 (7 pages).
4. José Risso, Alberto Cardona, Andres Anca, Violeta Colpachi, “Computation of Stress and
Strain Evolution During Heat Treatment of Work Rolls”, J. Appl. Mech. Nov 2006, 73(6):
1045-1053 (9 pages)
5. Austenite Martensite Bainite Pearlite and Ferrite structures. (2020). Retrieved from
https://www.twi-global.com/technical-knowledge/faqs/faq-what-are-the-microstructural-
constituents-austenite-martensite-bainite-pearlite-and-ferrite

44