4.6 Article

On the possible role of triboplasma in friction and wear of diamond-like carbon films in hydrogen-containing environments

期刊

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0022-3727/42/7/075307

关键词

-

资金

  1. Center for Microanalysis of Materials, University of Illinois
  2. US Department of Energy [DEFG02-91-ER45439]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hydrogen-free diamond-like carbon (DLC) films (both amorphous (a-C) and tetrahedral amorphous carbon (ta-C)) suffer high friction and severe wear losses when tested in inert and/or high vacuum environments. However, they provide anomalous superlow friction and wear coefficients in the presence of hydrogen gas, water vapour and alcohol molecules in the test environment. In this paper, we used such films in a systematic study to further confirm that hydrogen indeed plays an important role in their friction and wear behaviours. To study the effect of hydrogen, we conducted sliding tests in a hydrogen-containing test chamber and analysed the chemistry of their sliding contact surfaces using a time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometer. Clearly, the sliding contact regions of the carbon films became very rich in hydrogen after tribological tests in the hydrogen-containing chamber. In an attempt to understand the fundamental tribochemical mechanisms involved, we performed additional tests on these DLC films using a highly instrumented tribometer that permitted us the visualization of triboplasmas generating at or in the vicinity of the sliding surfaces. In this test system, we confirmed the formation of a triboplasma inside the contact area of the DLC films as evidenced by the characteristic UV radiation. Based on these observations, we believe that the formation of such triboplasmas within the contact zones of these DLC films may have triggered unique tribochemical reactions between hydrogen and carbon atoms on their sliding surfaces and thus resulted in very low friction and wear during tests in hydrogen-containing environments.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据