4.4 Article

Slurry Erosion Resistance of Laser Clad NiCoCrFeAl3 High-Entropy Alloy Coatings

Journal

TRIBOLOGY TRANSACTIONS
Volume 58, Issue 6, Pages 1119-1123

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10402004.2015.1044148

Keywords

Erosive Wear; Coatings; Metallurgical Analysis; Annealing

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51475140]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20141155]
  3. Tribology Science Fund of State Key Laboratory of Tribology, Tsinghua University [SKLTKF13B03]
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [2013B18314]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The slurry erosion resistance of laser-clad NiCoFeCrAl3 high-entropy alloy (HEA) coating was investigated by using a jet erosion testing machine. When the impingement angle increased from 15 degrees to 90 degrees, the volume loss of the HEA coating was accelerated firstly and then followed with a slight deceleration. The largest volume loss of this HEA coating was 4.1mm(3), which was acquired at a 45 degrees impingement angle after a 30-min erosion time with a 15wt% SiO2 particles (350-600m) at an impact velocity of 13m s(-1). Under the same erosion situation, the volume loss of 17-7 PH stainless steel was 5.4mm(3), which means that the HEA coating possesses better erosion resistance under this situation. Annealing treatment is beneficial to improve the erosion resistance of HEA coatings. The 950 degrees C annealed HEA coating had the best erosion resistance because the intermetallic compound Cr3Ni2 was precipitated from the matrix and the volume loss was reduced to 3.5mm(3) at a 45 degrees impingement angle. The worn surface morphologies of HEA coatings were characterized by grooves, ploughing marks, and a small quantity of brittle fractures, which suggests that plastic deformation and abrasive wear were the predominant mechanisms in the slurry erosion of the HEA coatings.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available