4.7 Article

High-stress abrasive wear response of 0.2% carbon dual phase steel: Effects of microstructural features and experimental conditions

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.msea.2006.12.083

关键词

low carbon steel; intercritical annealing; dual phase steel; high-stress abrasion; microstructure-abrasive wear property correlation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Effects of heat treatment on the high-stress abrasive wear response of 0.2% carbon steel have been investigated at varying applied loads, abrasive (SiC) sizes and sliding distances. The heat treatment involved intercritical annealing at three different temperatures between Ac-1 and Ac-3 followed by ice water quenching in order to produce a dual phase microstructure consisting of varying quantities of ferrite plus martensite. The wear rate increased monotonically with applied load irrespective of the heat treatment schedule. Further, the wear rate increased drastically when the abrasive size was increased from 15 to 27 mu m; a further increase in the abrasive size led to only a marginal increase in the wear rate. In general, the wear rate decreased with increasing sliding distance and attained a nearly stable value at longer sliding distances. Increasing intercritical annealing temperature resulted into higher martensite content, thereby leading to reduced wear rate. However, the extent of reduction in wear rate with martensite content has been found to change with the applied load and abrasive size. The present investigation clearly suggests that it is quite possible to attain desired combinations of bulk hardness and microstructure (ferrite plus martensite) that could greatly control abrasive wear properties in low carbon steel. The observed wear response of the samples has been explained on the basis of microconstituent-abrasive interaction during the course of abrasive action, degradation of the abrasive particles and the nature of various microconstituents, i.e. mechanical properties. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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