4.7 Article

Surface and tribology characterization of diamond-like carbon flakes reinforced oxide film by pulse anodizing

期刊

CERAMICS INTERNATIONAL
卷 49, 期 21, 页码 34205-34222

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2023.08.132

关键词

Diamond-like carbon; Anodizing; Tribology; Surface analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Using pulse current and DLC flakes can improve the surface quality and durability of hard anodizing. Increasing the DLC content enhances the hardness and wear resistance of the oxide film, while using 5 g/L DLC in the electrolyte reduces friction.
Hard anodizing by using direct current (DC) is one of the conventional approaches to fabricate composite oxide film. However, the formation of high porosity and microcracks lead to significant surface defects that limit its usage in load-bearing application. The present study aims to fabricate composite oxide film by applying pulse current (PC) with incorporating Diamond-like carbon (DLC) flakes to improve surface quality. For the first phase, the growth mechanism was studied by different anodizing time at constant (1 g/L DLC) in the electrolyte. Meanwhile, the mechanical and tribological performance of DLC content in the electrolyte were determined at second phase. Oxide film has been successfully fabricated on the surface of Aluminum alloy AA2017-T4 by anodizing in diluted sulphuric acid (20 wt%) containing DLC flakes. Then, surface morphological and tribological properties were evaluated. Results showed the thickness and growth rate of (1 g/L) DLC flakes reinforced oxide film fabricated by pulse current and direct current, approximately measured at 34.41 gm (growth rate: 0.58 gm/min) and 118.08 gm (growth rate: 1.97 gm/min), respectively. By increasing the DLC content (0-20 g/ L) in electrolyte, it enhanced the microhardness and durability of the composite oxide film. However, oxide film fabricated with 5 g/L DLC in electrolyte formed enough transfer layer to reduce friction during the sliding wear process.

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