Investigating Extra Carbon in Steel Using SEM

  • Thread starter Thread starter lancashire liuyu
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Carbon Steel
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the unexpected high carbon content detected in metal samples, particularly steel, during Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) analysis. Participants explore potential sources of contamination and the implications for material analysis, including considerations of sample preparation and the nature of the fracture surfaces being examined.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that contamination from handling, environmental factors, or chemical reactions could explain the high carbon levels in the samples.
  • Another participant questions the specific area being analyzed on the fracture surface, noting that such surfaces can contain various alloying and impurity elements that may not reflect the nominal composition of the steel.
  • Concerns are raised about the possibility of intergranular fracture along grain boundaries, which may contain chromium carbide precipitates, potentially affecting the carbon readings.
  • Participants inquire about the type of SEM analyzer used and the analysis parameters, suggesting that sample preparation and potential contamination from previous users or unclean samples could lead to erroneous results.
  • One participant emphasizes that an SEM alone does not provide composition analysis without an EDAX attachment, indicating the need for more specific details about the measurement process.
  • There is a discussion about the definitions of "normal" steel and the implications of using different grades or types of steel, including stainless steel, which may have different carbon content thresholds.
  • Another participant shares experiences of false carbon peaks in EDX compositional analysis due to oil contamination, suggesting that similar issues could be at play in the current analysis.
  • A participant describes a specific instance where a steel sample was analyzed without preparation, resulting in a significantly higher carbon reading than expected.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express multiple competing views regarding the sources of the high carbon readings and the validity of the analysis. There is no consensus on the primary cause of the discrepancies observed in the carbon content of the samples.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations related to the lack of detailed information about sample preparation, the specific type of steel analyzed, and the potential for cross-contamination during the analysis process. The discussion highlights the complexity of accurately determining material composition in SEM studies.

lancashire liuyu
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
when i was using Scanning Electron Microscope to investigate fracture surface of a metal sample,the results of composition of it appeared so different to what the composition should be, that sample contains 2% carbon comparing to normally 0.1%. i thought there are 3 ways of doing that:
1.hand--i need to use my hand to handle the operation during the process.
scurf and sweat may pollute the sample surface.
2.environment--instrument;air with high content of carbon dioxide;
residual grease.
3.Chemical reaction--with all possible source.
what is the major reason of that happened? any possibility else?
it's about my project,thank you!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
... the 1st question that comes to my mind is what were you actually analyzing from the fracture surface? Fracture surfaces often have concentrations of various alloying, impurity etc. elements (which contribute to the fracture process and as a result often reside there, and are the focal point of analysis), so is there a chance you are analyzing something which shouldn't have the nominal composition of the steel?
 
It might be possible that the facture is along the grain boundaries (intergranular fracture) which have chromium carbide (Cr23C6) precipitates.
 
Last edited:
PerennialII said:
... the 1st question that comes to my mind is what were you actually analyzing from the fracture surface? Fracture surfaces often have concentrations of various alloying, impurity etc. elements (which contribute to the fracture process and as a result often reside there, and are the focal point of analysis), so is there a chance you are analyzing something which shouldn't have the nominal composition of the steel?
i was using the normal type of steel,which contains normally 0.1%carbon in itself. and the same situation happened in other materials which should not have any carbon inside, like aluminum,copper.
 
Astronuc said:
I might be possible that the facture is along the grain boundaries (intergranular fracture) which have chromium carbide (Cr23C6) precipitates.
and why there is chromium carbide precipitated inside?? theoretically i used pure materials,like copper,aluminum...
 
lancashire liuyu said:
i was using the normal type of steel,which contains normally 0.1%carbon in itself. and the same situation happened in other materials which should not have any carbon inside, like aluminum,copper.

What kind of an analyzer were you using in your SEM (and with what sort of analysis parameters if there is something unusual or so in them)? Sample preparation might be one, how was it done and were there any steps which might result in carbon 'contamination'? If you're getting the result (with the analyzer) consistently irrespective of the sample, might the analyzer / SEM unit have gotten contaminated itself (like by some other user)? Sometimes we have problems when someone studies unclean samples, especially samples which have been in corrosive etc. environments.
 
An SEM itself will not give you a composition analysis - it takes an EDAX attachment to get that info.

Now really, unless the OP provides more specifics on the measurement, any discussion is quite a waste of time.

First, it was said that the high C content was measured in a steel (what grade??). Later, we find out that this was also seen in "theoretically" pure metals (again, no description of grade). There is no mention of sample history (notably, type of fracture), preparation or instrumentation.
 
and why there is chromium carbide precipitated inside??
I was thinking of Stainless Steel with about 0.08%C or higher, and chromium carbides will precipitate based on thermal treatment. It is one reason to develop low carbon SS, with =< 0.03% C.

What does one mean by 'normal' steel? There are structural steels or various types, and stainless steels of various types.

e.g. http://www.keytosteel.com/default.aspx?ID=CheckArticle&NM=64

As PerennialII and Gokul questioned, what sample prep did on use. Any grinding with SiC, for example, and grinding liquid? Any type of etchant, or cleaning with alcohol or other carbon-bearing material? If one is sampling 'pure' materials, maybe there is cross-contamination in one's procedures.

Also, as Gokul alluded, does the SEM process involve another analysis? XRF? or EDAX? See for example - http://www.edax.com/

One find this useful in the future:
http://www.keytosteel.com/default.aspx?ID=Articles
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The few times I've used EDX compositional analysis on fracture surfaces using an SEM (failed combustion engine components), I've generally found false carbon peaks to be down to oil contamination.
 
  • #10
for instance,i broke using tensile mechine steel sample A first, and i did not do any preparation,i.e coating, before place it into SEM,the result of its composition comes out by EDAX on carbon is 2.74% comparing to theoretical value 0.1%...basically same things happened to copper and aluminum...
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
6K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
10K
Replies
4
Views
10K
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
32K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
12K