4.4 Article

Effect of Impact Angle on Slurry Erosion Behavior and Mechanisms of Carburized AISI 5117 Steel

期刊

出版社

ASME
DOI: 10.1115/1.4025874

关键词

slurry erosion; carburizing; impact angle; AISI 5117 steel; wear resistance; erosion mechanisms

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The paper reports the influence of carburizing on the slurry erosion behavior of AISI 5117 steel using a whirling-arm rig. The microstructure and hardness profile of the surface layer of carburized steel were investigated. For characterizing the slurry damage process and for better understanding of material removal at different angles, scanning electron microscope (SEM) images at different locations on eroded surface using stepwise erosion combined with relocation SEM were presented. The study is also focused on studying the erosion wear resistance properties of AISI 5117 steel after carburizing at different impact angles. The tests were carried out with particle concentration of 1 wt. %, and the impact velocity of slurry stream was 15 m/s. Silica sand has a nominal size range of 250 - 355 mu m was used as an erodent. The results showed that, carburizing process of steel increased the erosion resistance and hardness compared with untreated material for all impact angles. The erosion resistance of AISI 5117 steel increases by 75%, 61%, 33%, 10% at an impact angle of 30 deg, 45 deg, 60 deg, and 90 deg, respectively, as result of carburizing, i. e., the effectiveness of carburizing was the highest at low impact angles. Treated and untreated specimens behaved as ductile material, and the maximum mass loss appeared at impact angle of 45 deg. Plough grooves and cutting lips appeared for acute impact angle, but the material extrusions were for normal impact angles. The erosion traces were wider and deeper for untreated specimens comparing by the shallower and superficial ones for the carburized specimens. Chipping of the former impact sites by subsequent impact particles plays an important role in developing erosion.

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

4.4
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