Plasma Surface Engineering

1,404 views

Published on

Seminário apresentado pelo doutor Santiago Corujeira Gallo, na UCS (Caxias do Sul, RS) em
28 de setembro de 2009. Público: estudantes, professores e pesquisadores da Pós-Graduação em Materiais (PGMat -UCS)

Published in: Technology
1 Comment
4 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,404
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
21
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
44
Comments
1
Likes
4
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Plasma Surface Engineering

  1. 1. Plasma Surface Engineering Santiago Corujeira Gallo Universidade de Caxias do Sul September 2009
  2. 2. Birmingham - UK Founded in middle age (7th century) Population ca 2,500,000 Traditional industrial centre Cultural diversity powered by google maps
  3. 3. University of Birmingham Founded in 1900 Research oriented Ranked 12th in UK (RAE) Multicultural over 4000 Intl students from 150 countries Colleges Arts and Law Engineering and Physical Sciences Life and Environmental Sciences Medical and Dental Sciences Social Sciences
  4. 4. Surface Engineering Group (2007) Composition of the group: 1 Professor 1 Senior Lecturer / Reader 2 Research fellows 1 Visiting research fellow 7 PhD students 2 MSc students 2 Undergraduate students Topics of research: - Plasma diffusion treatments - Thermal oxidation - PVD coatings - Nanoindentation
  5. 5. Active screen plasma surface engineering of austenitic stainless steel for enhanced tribological and corrosion properties • Austenitic stainless steel • Plasma surface engineering • Tribological and corrosion properties • Active screen
  6. 6. Austenitic stainless steel • Typical composition: 18% Cr – 8% Ni • AISI 316: 17% Cr – 12% Ni – 2% Mo Typical properties: • Excellent corrosion resistance • Non-magnetic • No ductile-to-brittle transition • Poor mechanical properties • Low wear resistance
  7. 7. Surface engineering treatments Benefits of surface engineering • Improved performance • Use cheaper materials • Increase design flexibility Diffusion treatments: • No sharp interface - gradient • Slow (temperature – time)
  8. 8. Plasma surface engineering C or N containing gas Conventional gas nitriding ~ 550oC Treated substrate Conventional gas carburising ~ 950oC C or N containing gas at low pressure - - Cr23C6 + Cr1-2N - Treated substrate - cathode (-)
  9. 9. GDOES composition depth profiles
  10. 10. XRD - phase identification S-phase or expanded austenite
  11. 11. Micrographs of expanded austenite Typical cross section optical micrograph Typical top view SEM micrograph
  12. 12. Microhardness testing Typical instrumented hardness test curves Typical load bearing capacity
  13. 13. Microhardness indents Tough carbon expanded austenite Brittle nitrogen expanded austenite
  14. 14. Wear testing Dry sliding pin-on-disc test, 10 N normal load, WC counterpart, 0.03 m/s sliding speed; 4.5 hours
  15. 15. Wear results AISI 316 UT AISI 316 PC
  16. 16. Morphology of the wear tracks AISI 316 UT AISI 316 PC
  17. 17. Wear track of AISI 316 UT
  18. 18. Wear track of AISI 316 PC
  19. 19. Wear debris Untreated sample: metallic debris Treated sample: oxide debris Wear debris Colour Size Magnetic Possible phases Treated Red / Orange <20um No alpha-Fe2O3 Hematite Un treated Black >20um Yes Fe3O4 Magnetite
  20. 20. Wear debris – TEM SAD pattern
  21. 21. Wear conclusions • The wear resistance of carbon expanded austenite is 2 orders of magnitude higher than AISI 316 UT • The wear mechanism changes from adhesive wear in AISI 316 UT to oxidational wear in AISI 316 PC • The layer of carbon expanded austenite reduces the subsurface deformation and supports the protective oxide layer
  22. 22. Corrosion testing Immersion corrosion Boiling H2SO4 (16%) 1 to 20 hours
  23. 23. Corrosion results AISI 316 UT AISI 316 PC After 1 hour immersed in boiling sulphuric acid (16%)
  24. 24. Corrosion mechanisms
  25. 25. Corrosion mechanisms - Schematic
  26. 26. Macrographs of corroded samples AISI 316 UT AISI 316 DCPC AISI 316 ASPC AISI 316 DCPC AISI 316 ASPC Macrographs “as treated”
  27. 27. Corrosion conclusions • Carbon expanded austenite exhibits higher corrosion resistance to boiling sulphuric acid than AISI 316 UT • The corrosion mechanisms are defect-controlled (MnS inclusions, slip bands and grain boundaries) • The AS treated samples performed better than the DC ones through the elimination of edge effects
  28. 28. Active screen plasma treatments Active Screen experimental setting inside a conventional DC plasma furnace / reactor Nitriding mechanisms of Active Screen - schematics
  29. 29. DC and AS plasma reactors
  30. 30. Industrial AS plasma furnace
  31. 31. AS typical treatment cycle
  32. 32. Processing conditions
  33. 33. Benefits of AS treatment DC – edge effect DC – arcing damage AS – feature less AS –rusty components before ASPN AS – rusty components after ASPN
  34. 34. Active Screen conclusions • AS plasma treatments can produce superior surface quality than DC treatments (no edge effect or arcing damage) • AS treatments are less sensitive to the surface condition of components (rust, oil, etc.) • AS plasma shows potential to further improve the results obtained with DC or other plasma treatments
  35. 35. Acknowledgements This project was sponsored by: EU scholarships for Latin America Techint group The University of Birmingham Universidad Tecnológica Nacional
  36. 36. Thank you very much indeed

×