4.6 Article

Effects of surface microstructure on the active element content and wetting behavior of brazing filler metal during brazing Ti3SiC2 ceramic and Cu

期刊

VACUUM
卷 156, 期 -, 页码 256-263

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vacuum.2018.07.043

关键词

Ti3SiC2 ceramic; Surface microstructure; Wetting; Brazing filler metal

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51405390, 51775442]
  2. Project of Key areas of innovation team in Shaanxi Province [2014KCT-12]
  3. State Key Laboratory of Solidification Processing in NWPU [113-QP-2014]
  4. Aeronautical Science Foundation of China [2016ZE53040]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The wetting behavior of Ag-Cu-xTi (x = 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4.5 wt. %) brazing filler metals on Ti(3)SiC(2 )ceramic was investigated. Moreover, two methods, the addition of reactive element Ti in filler metals and surface microstructure on Ti3SiC2, were used to decrease the wetting angle of filler metals. When employing the addition of Ti, the wetting angle of Ag-Cu-xTi gradually decreased with increasing the content of Ti from 0 to 4.5 wt. %, while the interface brittle compounds increased during the same course. According to wetting theory, a square convex platform and groove microstructure was designed to promote the wetting of Ag-Cu-2Ti. The microstructure was processed on Ti3SiC2 surfaces by laser machine, the effects of microstructures on wetting behavior were verified experimentally. The results show that the wetting angle of Ag-Cu-2Ti on Ti3SiC2 with surface microstructure decreased effectively compared with that on smooth Ti3SiC2. Meanwhile, the same wetting behavior and less interface brittle compounds could be achieved by using surface microstructure and filler metal with less Ti. The experimental results had a sound fit with theoretical calculation. The novel method provided a feasible route for optimizing filler metal composition and promoting the application of filler metals with less reactive element in brazing field.

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