4.7 Article

Reversal of favorable microstructure under plastic ploughing vs. interfacial shear induced wear in aged Co1.5CrFeNi1.5Ti0.5 high-entropy alloy

期刊

WEAR
卷 468, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.wear.2020.203595

关键词

High entropy alloy; Atomic force microscopy; Plastic ploughing; Interfacial shear

资金

  1. department of applied mechanics
  2. department of materials science and engineering of IIT Delhi
  3. Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) [108-2221-E-009-131-MY4]
  4. High Entropy Materials Center from The Featured Areas Research Center Program

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study reveals that peak-aged HEA exhibits the highest wear resistance in scratch tests dominated by plastic ploughing, but may show the lowest wear resistance in low load AFM experiments without plastic ploughing. By controlling the size and distribution of precipitates, the use of HEAs for sliding components can potentially be extended.
The microscopic tribological behaviour of the aged Co1.5CrFeNi1.5Ti0.5 high entropy alloy (HEA) is examined using nanoindentation and atomic force microscopy (AFM). The effect of aging of the HEA viz. under-aged, peak aged and over-aged conditions on the tribological properties is investigated under different loading conditions. In nanoindentation based scratch tests, wear is dominated by plastic ploughing and the peak-aged HEA shows the highest wear resistance, owing to its higher hardness. Interestingly, in low load AFM based experiments, in absence of plastic ploughing, the wear behaviour is reversed, i.e., the wear resistance of the peak-aged condition is lowest. Higher interfacial shear strength values, as determined using wearless AFM based sliding experiments, is attributed to the least wear resistance of the peak-aged condition. The observed tribological behaviour can potentially extend the use of HEAs for sliding components by controlling the optimum size and distribution of precipitates under different loading conditions.

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

4.7
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