4.6 Article

Corrosion Behavior of Chromium Coated Zy-4 Cladding under CANDU Primary Circuit Conditions

期刊

COATINGS
卷 11, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/coatings11111417

关键词

corrosion; Zircaloy-4; Cr coating; SEM; XRD; XPS; porosity; micro hardness

资金

  1. Romanian Ministry of National Education, UEFISCDI [NECOMAT-326PED/2020]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The manuscript focuses on the corrosion behavior of a Cr coating under CANDU primary circuit conditions. Through various experiments, it was determined that the Cr coating autoclaved for 3024 h on Zircaloy-4 alloy exhibited the best corrosion resistance.
The manuscript is focused on corrosion behavior of a Cr coating under CANada Deuterium Uranium(CANDU) primary circuit conditions. The Cr coating is obtained via the thermionic vacuum arc procedure on Zircaloy -4 cladding. The surface coating characterization was performed using metallographic analysis and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) with an energy dispersive spectra detector (EDS), X-ray diffraction (XRD), and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) investigations. The thickness of the Cr coating determined from SEM images is around 500 nm layers After the autoclaving period, the thickness of the samples increased in time slowly. The kinetic of oxidation established a logarithmic oxidation law. The corrosion tests for various autoclaving periods of time include electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and potentiodynamic tests, permitting computing porosity and efficiency of protection. All surface investigations sustain electrochemical results and promote the Cr coating on Zircaloy-4 alloy autoclaved for 3024 h as the best corrosion resistance based on decrease in corrosion current density values simultaneously with the increase of the time spent in autoclave. A slow increase of Vickers micro hardness was observed as a function of the autoclaved period as well. The value reached for 3024 h being 219 Kgf/mm(2) compared with 210 Kgf/mm(2) value before autoclaving.

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