Abstract: By comparing GB/T 18254—2016 and SEP 1520-1998 of two carbide network evaluation standards, the impact of the difference in rating magnification, rating picture pedigree and rating principles on quality judgment was analyzed. The results show that compared with the GB/T 18254—2016 standard, the map setting, detection and evaluation methods of the SEP 1520-1998 standard reflect the physical level more comprehensively and are more operable. At the same time, it is proposed that due to the difference in the cooling rate of the surface layer and the core of large bearing member, the control requirements for the grade of carbide network on the surface and in the center should be separately proposed according to the effective thickness.

Key words: high carbon chromium bearing steel, carbide network, evaluation standard, comparative analysis