Effect of Flow Velocity and Impact Angle On Erosion-Corrosion Behavior of Chromium Carbide Coating

Journal of Tribology.
Received April 09, 2016;

Accepted manuscript posted August 12, 2016. doi:10.1115/1.4034424
Copyright (c) 2016 by
ASME
Journal
of Tribology
ed
ite
d
Effect of flow velocity and impact angle on

erosion-corrosion behavior of chromium
carbide coating
py
A. R. Hemmati
Centre of Excellence for High Strength Alloys Technology, School of Metallurgy and
Materials Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Narmak, Tehran
16844, Iran
Alireza_Hemmati.1990@yahoo.com
tN
ot
Co
M. Soltanieh1
16844, Iran
Email Address: Mansour_Soltanieh@iust.ac.ir
sc
rip
S.M. Masoudpanah
16844, Iran
Masoodpanah@iust.ac.ir
Ma
nu
ABSTRACT
Ac
ce
pt
ed
In this study, the effect of flow velocity (4-7.5 m s-1) and impact angle (30-90o) on erosion-corrosion
behavior of chromium carbide coating was investigated under impingement by silica containing NaCl
solution. Chromium carbide coating was deposited on low carbon steel by thermal reactive
deposition/diffusion method at 1050oC for 12 hours in a molten salt bath. Mass loss measurement and
potentiodynamic polarization tests were employed in order to determine coating performance under
impingement. Polarization curves showed that the coated samples had less corrosion current density and
high chemical stability. High mass loss at low impact angle indicated ductile behavior for the uncoated
sample, while the mass loss for the coated sample changes less than 30% with impact angle up to 60o.
Furthermore, the erosion-corrosion behavior of the coated sample was slightly dependent on flow velocity.
Scanning electron micrographs showed that at lower impact angle, the Cr 7C3 coating eroded with flake
fragmentation mechanism, while at high impact angle, fatigue fracture is the main degradation
mechanism.
Keywords: Erosion-corrosion, chromium carbide, flow velocity, impact angle.
Corresponding author: Tel: (+98)-2177240540

Fax: (+98)-2177240480
Email Address: Mansour_Soltanieh@iust.ac.ir
1
TRIB-16-1120 (Research paper), Soltanieh
Downloaded From: http://tribology.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/23/2016 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
1- INTRODUCTION
Erosion-corrosion phenomenon is defined as the increase in the rate of
ite
d
metal/alloy degradation caused by combined action of mechanical damage and

electrochemical corrosion. The mechanical damage introduced by impacting solid
py
ed
particles and liquid droplet [1]. Since there is an interaction between erosion and
corrosion, the total material loss due to erosion-corrosion is much greater than the sum
Co
of the pure erosion and the pure corrosion, individually [2]. There are three different
parameters affecting the erosion-corrosion behavior, namely, sample material
tN
ot
characteristic (including hardness, microstructure, strength, ductility and toughness),

environment conditions (slurry composition, flow velocity, impact angle, and
sc
r
ip
temperature), and eroding particle features (such as mass, hardness, density, size,
shape) [3]. The erosion-corrosion damage is strongly influenced by the impact angle and
Ma
nu
flow velocity. The impact angle controls stress distribution originating from impacting
particles on metals surface, which affects the damage mechanisms. Moreover, particles
ed
impact transfer kinetic energy on the surface. This energy directly related to flow
velocity and particle size. There is a threshold impact kinetic energy that breaks the
ce
pt
passive film and results in high mass loss [4, 5].
Ac
Erosion-corrosion is one of the most common problems in engineering and

mining industries. In order to obtaining a desirable service life, material selection is
obviously crucial to minimize wear of a component [6]. Erosion-corrosion damage can
be prevented by using various methods such as application of inhibitors [7, 8],
improvement in design [9], higher resistance material [10, 11], and hard coatings of
2

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
metal/alloy surface [4, 5, 11-14]. Hard coatings can withstand the mechanical damage
during impacts of eroding particles. The hard coating are usually carbides, nitrides,
carbo-nitrides, and borides which exhibit high chemical stability in corrosion
ite
d
environment [15]. Chromium carbide coating is widely applied in the engineering
py
ed
industry to improve surface properties of critical components, such as valves, pistons,

rods, hydraulic pistons, ball valves, turbine blades, etc. Most of these components are
exposed to wear and corrosion working conditions. Examples of such environments are
Co
found in oil production systems, hydroelectric power plants, paper and mining
ot
industries and desalinization plants [16]. This is because they offer high hardness, good
tN
wear resistance, and excellent resistance to high-temperature oxidation and excellent
ip
corrosion resistance in many environments [15-18]. Chromium carbide can be deposited
sc
r
by high velocity oxy-fuel [19], air plasma spraying [20], and thermo-reactive
Ma
nu
deposition/diffusion (TRD) process [21]. Espallargas et al. [16] compared the erosioncorrosion behavior of Cr3C2 and WC deposited by high velocity oxy-fuel. The chromium
carbide coatings have better performance against erosive conditions. This is because
ed
Chromium carbide coating presents an abrasive1 wear mechanism in corrosion condition
pt
[20, 22]. Although there are many literature on the erosion and corrosion performance
ce
of chromium carbide coating, the erosion-corrosion behavior of this coating was not
Ac
investigated. However, Cr-C coating as well as chromium carbide based cermet were
studied previously [6, 16, 18].
Wear by abrasion is a form of wear caused by contact between a particle and solid material. Abrasive
wear is the loss of material by the passage of hard particles over a surface.
3

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
The aim of this work was to study the effect of environment conditions including
impact angle and flow velocity on the performance of chromium carbide coating under
erosion-corrosion condition. To this end, a layer of chromium carbide coating was
ite
d
deposited on carbon steel by TRD method. Mass loss measurement was conducted in
py
ed
order to determine the effects of impact angle and flow velocity. SEM studies were
carried out to elucidate the dominant degradation mechanism of chromium carbide

coating as well as carbon steel. Finally, potentiodynamic polarization test was taken
Co
under impingement. Polarization curves have shown the better corrosion behavior of
tN
ot
the coated sample compared to uncoated one.
2. Experimental Procedure
sc
r
ip
A low carbon steel with 0.30 wt. %C, 0.12 wt. % Si, 0.50 wt. % Mn, and 0.14 wt. %
Cr was used as the substrate. Disc type samples with a 25 mm in diameter and a
Ma
nu
thickness of 10 mm were ground with grid abrasive paper. A molten salt bath method
for TRD treatment used in this research. To this end, 85 wt. % borax and 15 wt. % low
ed
carbon Ferro chromium were used as molten salt bath. Then, the samples were
immersed in molten salt at 1050oC for 12 hours followed by air cooling.
ce
pt
The cross-section of the coating was investigated by optical microscopy
Ac
(HUVITZ). X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis of chromium carbide coating was carried out
by using an X-ray diffractometer (Philips-PW1800) with copper K radiation. The microhardness of the coating was measured on the cross-section of chromium carbide coating
using a micro-hardness tester (SCTMC-MHV-1000z). The micro-hardness number were
average of three measurements in similar area to have reliable results.
4

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
The erosion-corrosion tests were carried out using an impingement jet apparatus
as shown in Fig. 1. A jet of 3.5 wt. % NaCl solution containing 3 wt. % SiO2 sand particles
from a nozzle with 5 mm in diameter was impacted to the sample surfaces. The SiO 2
ite
d
particle size was between 100 and 200 standard mesh. In order to ensure that all
py
ed
corrosion measurement are related to the erosion-corrosion process only, all the sample
surfaces were covered by sticky tapes except a circle with 0.2 cm2 surface area. So, in all
of the calculation, the sample surface was considered as 0.2 cm2. The distance between
Co
jet nozzle impact and surface was kept at 5 mm. Before the test, the samples were
ot
degreased by alcohol, washed in distilled water and dried in air. The test was carried out
tN
in 3 hours and after that, the samples were degreased, rinsed, dried and weighted using
was determined as:
Q
A , where Q, is the flow rate (m3 s-1) and A, is the nozzle
sc
r
ip
an analytical balance (Shimadzu-ATX 224) with an accuracy of 0.1 mg. The flow velocity
Ma
nu
surface area (m2). At normal impact angle, the fluid velocity was chosen as 4, 5, 6 and
7.5 m s-1. Furthermore, the impact angles of 30o, 45o and 60o were also used at constant
ed
flow velocity of 5 m s-1 to investigate the effect of impact angle.
pt
Field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) (MIRA3-TESCAN) was
ce
used in order to characterize the degradation mechanism.
Ac
Polarization curves were obtained using an EmStat3+ electrochemical

equipment. A conventional three-electrode cell was used for potentiodynamic test: the
sample as the working electrode, a platinum plate as the counter electrode and a
saturated calomel electrode (SCE) as the reference electrode. Potentiodynamic
5

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
polarization data were measured through sweeping the potential in a positive direction
from -900 to 600 mV at a sweep rate of 1 mV s-1 during the test in room temperature.
3. Results and discussion
ite
d
The optical microscopy and the cross sectional micro hardness profile of the
py
ed
coated sample are presented in Fig. 2. It is observed that two separate layer formed on
steel surface after TRD treatment. The micro hardness decreases gradually from 1380 to
300 HV0.01. In TRD process, when a chromium carbide layer is formed on the steel
Co
sample by the salt bath method, three stages must occur: First, chromium must be
ot
transferred from the chromium-containing bath to the steel sample surface. Second,
tN
carbon must be provided from the surface layer or interior one. In this Situation, the
ip
needed carbon must diffuse from the bulk of sample to its surface (once carbide layer is
sc
r
produced on the sample surface, carbon must, also, diffuse through it). Finally, the
Ma
nu
diffused carbon must react with the coming chromium from bath to from a stable
chromium carbide layer on the surface of the sample. The Cr concentration decreases
gradually from the surface to the sample depth. This leads to the formation of a layer
ed
with the higher micro hardness value in a range between 650-1000 HV0.01 which is
pt
higher than that of substrate. This is in agreement with other work [23, 24]. According
ce
to the micro hardness profile, the coating thickness is about 10-13 m. Moreover, X-ray
Ac
diffraction pattern of the coated sample (Fig. 3) shows the formation of Cr7C3 carbide
[Joint Committee on Powder Diffraction Standards (JCPDS) card number: 00-011-0550].
Same results has been obtained in other investigation [25, 26] in which the common top
layer phases after TRD treatment are Cr7C3, Cr23C6, and Fe-Cr ferrite phases.
6

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
Fig. 4 shows the effect of flow velocity on erosion-corrosion behavior of the

coated and uncoated samples. It is obvious that the higher flow velocity lead to higher
mass loss, due to the higher kinetic energy of eroding particles resulting in fracture of
ite
d
the material [27]. Furthermore, the mass loss of the coated and the uncoated samples
py
ed
increases from 3.06 to 6.28 mg cm-2 hr-1 and from 4.58 to 9.85 mg cm-2 hr-1 with
increasing the flow velocity from 4 to 7.5 m s-1, respectively. The coated sample shows
less mass loss than that of the uncoated sample in the whole range of flow velocity. This
Co
indicates that although the dependence of mass loss on flow velocity for the coated and
ot
uncoated sample is similar, the latter shows higher resistance in comparison to the
tN
former samples. Higher erosion-corrosion resistance of the coated samples is attributed
ip
to higher hardness as well as better corrosion resistance of chromium carbide (Cr 7C3)
sc
r
coating [23].
Ma
nu
With increasing the flow velocity, SiO2 particles eroded the surface at an
increased rate, thus removing the passive oxide layer at a higher rate. From the
electrochemical data, it was concluded that highest improvement in pure corrosion rate
ed
after coating was about 41% at a flow velocity of 4 m s-1. At this flow velocity, the value
pt
of pure corrosion rate for uncoated sample was 3.56 mg cm-2 hr-1, while the coated
ce
sample suffers 2.03 mg cm-2 hr-1. On the other hand, at flow velocity of 7.5 m s-1, the
Ac
pure corrosion rate for the coated and uncoated samples were almost equal.
Fig. 5 shows the potentiodynamic polarization curves of the uncoated and
coated samples at flow velocity of 5 m s-1. Looking at the both curve, for decreasing
potential, material starting with an anodic current on a thoroughly activated surface and
7

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
then the samples pass through a potential where the cathodic and anodic reaction rates
are equal and the log curve shows a V at zero crossing. Then the samples experience
cathodic current on an activated surface. The absence of passive region for the samples
ite
d
indicate an active dissolution dominating the anodic behavior. These results are similar
py
ed
to the results of Stack et al [28]. The slow increase in current density with potential at
the potential range of 0-600 mV is rather similar to traditional passivation region. The
higher corrosion resistance of the coated sample can be attributed to the higher
Co
chemical stability of Cr7C3 which leads to a better erosion-corrosion resistance [23]. In
ot
addition, increasing the flow velocity increases the oxygen transfer with fluid, hence it
tN
accelerate the formation of chromium oxide layer. This lead to a reduction in anodic
ip
current density, thus shifting the entire polarization curve to the left.
sc
r
Fig. 6 shows the mass loss of the coated and uncoated samples against impact
Ma
nu
angle. For all impact angles, the mass loss for the coated sample was lower than that of
the uncoated one. The mass loss of the uncoated sample increases with impact angle up
to 45o and then decreases, while the mass loss varies slightly for the coated sample. The
ed
maximum mass loss at impact angle of 45o can be attributed to the erosion-corrosion
pt
behavior of ductile material which experiencing maximum mass loss at shallow impact
ce
angle [13, 29]. The ductile materials are mostly subjected to abrasive wear by impact of
Ac
hard eroding particles on the soft surface and failure with cutting action [30-32]. The
dependency of the erosion rate to impact angle varies by impact velocity. At impact
velocity lower than threshold impact velocity, the deformation erosion is negligible.
When particle velocity increases up to normal impact angle, the deformation
8

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
mechanism become more dominated and changes the dependence of the erosion rate.
Arabnejad et al [32] believed that at all impact velocity, target material have not similar
performance at different impact angle. They proposed a model that it captured angle
ite
d
function variation with impact velocity and proved that this phenomena are only
py
ed
important at impact velocities which is higher than threshold impact velocity. However,
at higher impact angle, the flake formation resulting from impact of eroding particles it
is believed as the possible mechanism. In this situation, the repeated impact of eroding
Co
particles induce normal stress on surface. Once the stress exceed the elastic limit and
ot
form platelets on surface, Therefore, the abrasion mechanism is replaced by plastic
tN
deformation that may lead to material failure [33].
ip
The mass loss of the coated sample is not strongly dependent on impact angle.
sc
r
However, the mass loss increases slightly from 3.39 to 4.92 mg cm-2 hr-1 with impact
Ma
nu
angle up to 60o. This is similar to brittle material behavior under erosion-corrosion

conditions, which suffered maximum damage at higher impact angle. In this condition,
hard Cr7C3 coating can resist against abrasive wear due to its high hardness at low
ed
impact angle. In addition, the tough substrate enhanced erosion-corrosion resistance of
ce
impact angle.
pt
the Cr7C3 coating through the elimination of micro cracks propagation path at high
Ac
The potentiodynamic polarization curves of the uncoated and coated samples at
impact angle of 45o are shown in Fig. 7. The higher corrosion potential (Ecorr) of Cr7C3
coating compared to the uncoated sample shows more nobility of the Cr7C3 coating in
erosion-corrosion condition. In addition, the erosion-corrosion performance of the
9

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
coated sample after TRD treatment is better in comparison with the uncoated sample in
which the corrosion current density of the uncoated sample (7.37 10-4 A) is higher
than that of the coated sample (3.36 10-4 A).
ite
d
The SEM micrographs of the eroded surface of the coated sample at flow
py
ed
velocities of 6 and 7.5 m s-1 and at impact angle of 90o are depicted in Fig. 8. As can be
seen in Fig. 8, because of the erosion conditions, lots of erosion pits and subsurface
cracks formed in the sample surface. Inside some of the erosion pits, SiO2 particles are
Co
embedded, as shown in Fig. 8. Increasing the flow velocity, increased the number of pits
ot
and cracks. It is well known that the mass loss is due to the initiation and propagation of
tN
fatigue cracks. The hard and brittle Cr7C3 coating with high hardness (Fig. 3) resists
ip
against micro cutting and plastic deformation. Impact kinetic energy which transferred
sc
r
by eroding particles to surface results in aggregation of elastic strain energy and cracks
Ma
nu
nucleation in the brittle carbide grain of the coating. The cracks propagate by
continuously action of repeated impingement until the grain had been fragmented. This
is in agreement with other studies [34]. It is also observed that higher flow velocity
ed
causes deeper grooves in the surface leading to moderate increase in corrosion rate
pt
[35]. Eroding particles which have low flow velocity and subsequently low kinetic energy
ce
cannot directly fractured Cr7C3 coating. Elastic strain energy which transmitted to the
Ac
surface during erosion-corrosion test, controlled the resistance of chromium carbide to

brittle fracture. In addition, elastic energy inversely depends on the Youngs modulus
[6]. It is well known that controlling some properties of the coating including elastic
modulus (E) and hardness (H) in order to reach higher ratio of H/E-which known as
10

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
toughness of the coating- can improve tribological performance of the coating [36].
Cr7C3 coating with high hardness (1400 HV) and elastic modulus (370 GPa) [37] shows
good resistance under erosive conditions. The higher impact energy resulting from
ite
d
eroding particles at high flow velocity, the more intensive cracking at both impact region
py
ed
and the subsurface.
Fig. 9 shows the SEM micrographs of the eroded surface of the coated sample at
impact angle of 60o and 90o at 5m s-1 flow velocity. As shown in Fig 9 (a), the erosion test
Co
done at impact angle of 90o causes some micro cracks in the erosion pits. Most
ot
probably, these micro cracks cause brittle fracture in coating layer. For chromium
tN
carbide coating, it can be suggested that subsurface lateral cracking is the main
ip
mechanism for material removal.
sc
r
The repeated impacts of the erodent at impact angle of 60o (Fig 9 (b)), applies
Ma
nu
shear stress on the surface leading to the propagation of the micro cracks along the
impact direction. Moreover, the micro cracks increase material surface area subjected
to corrosion which enhances corrosion, which was stated by Stack et al [18]. High shear
ed
stress component at impact angle of 60o results in directional propagation of subsurface
pt
cracks which formed during particle impact. These cracks, then linked together leading
ce
to material removal by flake fragmentation. Levy et al [38] believed that during erosion-
Ac
corrosion, a combined mechanism of ductile and brittle erosion failure occur, but
primarily the brittle behavior. He showed that cracking and chipping off a small pieces of
scales are the main erosion-corrosion failure mechanism of brittle coating. Since
chromium carbide coating is the corrosion-resistance coating, it has been suggested that
11

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
it suffers erosion-corrosion by cracking and or flake fragmentation mechanism and

subsequently, it can be eroded by platelet formation. At impact angle of 90 o, the high
normal stress component can promote the fatigue fracture.
ite
d
4. Conclusions
py
ed
Chromium carbide coating was successfully deposited on low carbon steel using
thermal reactive deposition method. The effect of flow velocity and impact angle on
erosion-corrosion performance of the coated sample was investigated. The mass loss of
Co
the coated samples was slightly changed with the impact angle, on account of high
ot
hardness and corrosion resistance of the chromium carbide coating. As a results the
tN
chromium carbide coating was not sensitive to impact angle. On the other hand, the
ip
uncoated samples show the ductile behavior under erosion-corrosion condition. The
sc
r
ductile erosion behavior experience maximum mass loss at oblique angle. In addition,
Ma
nu
increasing the flow velocity lead to increase in mass loss change with gentle slope and
reach to a maximum at a flow velocity of 7.5 m s-1. This is because of high hardness of
coated samples, which resist against eroding particles kinetic energy. Microstructural
ed
observation showed that the higher impact energy at high flow velocity introduce may
pt
be deeper pits on surface. Inside the pits, embedded particles as well as subsurface
ce
cracks observed. This confirm a brittle fracture. Furthermore, shear stress at lower
Ac
impact angle propagates cracks and forms flakes. During the erosion-corrosion test,
repeated impact of the eroding particles results in flake fragmentation.
12

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
Flow velocity, m. s-1
flow rate, m3 s-1
nozzle surface area, m2
Ac
ce
pt
ed
Ma
nu
sc
r
ip
tN
ot
Co
py
ed
ite
d
NOMENCLATURE
13

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
REFERENCES
]1[ M. Stack and B. Jana, 2011, "Models and mechanisms of erosioncorrosion in
ite
d
metals," Tribocorrosion Passiv. Met. Coatings, Woodhead publishing, pp. 153-184.

]2[ A. Neville, F. Reza, S. Chiovelli, and T. Revega, 2005 "Erosioncorrosion behaviour of
py
ed
WC-based MMCs in liquidsolid slurries," Wear, vol. 259, pp. 181-195.
]3[ Y. Yang and Y. Cheng, 2012 "Parametric effects on the erosioncorrosion rate and
Co
mechanism of carbon steel pipes in oil sands slurry," Wear, vol. 276, pp. 141-148.
]4[ Y. Wang, Y. Zheng, W. Ke, W. Sun, W. Hou, X. Chang, et al., 2011 "Slurry erosion
tN
ot
corrosion behaviour of high-velocity oxy-fuel (HVOF) sprayed Fe-based amorphous

metallic coatings for marine pump in sand-containing NaCl solutions," Corrosion science,
sc
r
ip
vol. 53, pp. 3177-3185.
]5[ Z. Zheng, Y. Zheng, W. Sun, and J. Wang, 2013, "Erosioncorrosion of HVOF-sprayed
Ma
nu
Fe-based amorphous metallic coating under impingement by a sand-containing NaCl

solution," Corrosion Science, vol. 76, pp. 337-347.
ed
]6[ I. Hussainova, I. Jasiuk, M .Sardela, and M. Antonov, 2009 "Micromechanical

properties and erosive wear performance of chromium carbide based cermets," Wear,
ce
pt
vol. 267, pp. 152-159.
Ac
]7[ X. Hu, K. Alzawai, A. Gnanavelu, A. Neville, C. Wang, A. Crossland, et al., 2011,

"Assessing the effect of corrosion inhibitor on erosioncorrosion of API-5L-X65 in multiphase jet impingement conditions," Wear, vol. 271, pp. 1432-1437.
]8[ A. Neville and C. Wang, 2009, "Erosioncorrosion mitigation by corrosion inhibitors
an assessment of mechanisms," Wear, vol. 267, pp. 195-203.
14

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
]9[ I. Kleis and P. Kulu, "Solid particle erosion, 2008, "Occurrence, Prognosification and
Control.
corrosion performance on a range of stainless steels," Wear.
ite
d
]10[ L. Giourntas, T. Hodgkiess, and A. Galloway, 2015 "Comparative study of erosion
py
ed
]11[ J. Caicedo, G. Cabrera, H. Caicedo, and W. Aperador, 2012, "A Comparative Study of
Corrosive-Erosive Effects at AISI D3 Steel, 304 Stainless Steel and CrN/AlN Material,"
Open Materials Science Journal, vol. 6, pp. 14-21.
Co
]12[ D. Lopez, C. Snchez, and A. Toro, 2005, "Corrosionerosion behavior of TiN-coated
ot
stainless steels in aqueous slurries," Wear, vol. 258, pp. 684-692.
tN
]13[ Y. Purandare, M. Stack, and P. E. Hovsepian, 2006, "Velocity effects on erosion
ip
corrosion of CrN/NbN superlattice PVD coatings," Surface and Coatings Technology,
sc
r
vol. 201, pp. 361-370.
Ma
nu
]14[ G. Saha, T. Khan, and G. Zhang, 2011, "Erosioncorrosion resistance of

microcrystalline and near-nanocrystalline WC17Co high velocity oxy-fuel thermal spray
coatings ",Corrosion Science, vol. 53, pp. 2106-2114.
ed
]15[ F.-S. Chen, P.-Y. Lee, and M.-C. Yeh, 1998, "Thermal reactive deposition coating of
pt
chromium carbide on die steel in a fluidized bed furnace," Materials chemistry and
ce
physics, vol. 53, pp. 19-27.
Ac
]16[ N. Espallargas, J. Berget, J. Guilemany, A. Benedetti, and P. Suegama, 2008, "Cr3C2

NiCr and WCNi thermal spray coatings as alternatives to hard chromium for erosion
corrosion resistance," Surface and Coatings Technology, vol. 202, pp. 1405-1417, 2008.
15

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
]17[ S. Sen, 2005, "A study on kinetics of CrxC-coated high-chromium steel by thermoreactive diffusion technique," Vacuum, vol. 79, pp. 63-70.
]18[ M. Stack, M. Antonov, and I. Hussainova, 2006, "Some views on the erosion
ite
d
corrosion response of bulk chromium carbide based cermets," Journal of Physics D:
py
ed
Applied Physics, vol. 39, p. 3165.
]19[ B. Q. Wang and Z. R. Shui, 2002, "The hot erosion behavior of HVOF chromium
carbide-metal cermet coatings sprayed with different powders," Wear, vol. 253, pp.
Co
550-557.
ot
]20[ A. Yaghtin, E. Salahinejad, A. Khosravifard, A. Araghi, and A. Akhbarizadeh, 2015,
tN
"Corrosive wear behavior of chromium carbide coatings deposited by air plasma
ip
spraying," Ceramics International, vol. 41, pp. 7916-7920.
sc
r
]21[ T. Arai and S. Moriyama, 1995, "Growth behavior of chromium carbide and niobium
Ma
nu
carbide layers on steel substrate, obtained by salt bath immersion coating process,"
Thin Solid Films, vol. 259, pp. 174-180.
]22[ H. Czichos, 1978, "Tribology. A systems approach to the science and technology of
ed
friction, lubrication and wear," Elsevier Scientific Publishing Co., p. 414.
pt
]23[ Fesahat, M., Soltanieh, M. and Eivani, A.R., 2016. "Effect of plasma nitriding on
ce
nanostructure of TRD coating." Surface Engineering, pp.1-7.
Ac
]24[ F. Hakami, M. H. Sohi, J. R. Ghani, and M. Ebrahimi, 2011, "Chromizing of plasma

nitrided AISI 1045 steel," Thin Solid Films, vol. 519, pp. 6783-6786.
16

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
]25[ S. Y. Lee and S.-S. Kang, 1999, "Effect of plasma nitriding on the surface properties
of the chromium diffusion coating layer in iron-base alloys," Surface and Coatings
Technology, vol. 116, pp. 391-397.
ite
d
]26[ H. Karimi Zarchi, M. Jalaly, M. Soltanieh, and H. Mehrjoo, 2009, "Comparison of the
py
ed
activation energies of the formation of chromium carbide coating on carburized and

uncarburized AISI 1020 Steel," steel research international, vol. 80, pp. 859-864.
]27[ Z. Zheng, Y. Zheng, X. Zhou, S. He, W. Sun, and J. Wang, 2014, "Determination of the
Co
critical flow velocities for erosioncorrosion of passive materials under impingement by
ot
NaCl solution containing sand," Corrosion Science, vol. 88, pp. 187-196.
tN
]28[ M. Stack and G. Abdulrahman, 2010, "Mapping erosion-corrosion of carbon steel in
ip
oil exploration conditions: Some new approaches to characterizing mechanisms and
sc
r
synergies," Tribology International, vol. 43, pp. 1268-1277.
Ma
nu
]29[ Hutchings, I.M., 1992. "Ductile-brittle transitions and wear maps for the erosion
and abrasion of brittle materials.", Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 25(1A), p.A212.
]30[ M. Al-Bukhaiti, S. Ahmed, F. Badran, and K. Emara, 2007, "Effect of impingement
ed
angle on slurry erosion behaviour and mechanisms of 1017 steel and high-chromium
pt
white cast iron," Wear, vol. 262, pp. 1187-1198.
ce
]31[ G. Burstein and K. Sasaki, 2000,"Effect of impact angle on the slurry erosion
Ac
corrosion of 304L stainless steel," Wear, vol. 240, pp. 80-94.

]32[ H. Arabnejad, A. Mansouri, S. Shirazi, and B. McLaury, 2015, "Development of
mechanistic erosion equation for solid particles," Wear, vol. 332, pp. 1044-1050.
17

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
]33[ G. Stachowiak and A. W. Batchelor, 2013, "Engineering tribology", ButterworthHeinemann.

]34[ W. Wan, J. Xiong, Z. Guo, L. Tang, and H. Du, 2015, "Research on the contributions
ite
d
of corrosion, erosion and synergy to the erosioncorrosion degradation of Ti (C, N)
py
ed
based cermets," Wear, vol. 326, pp. 36-43.
]35[ B. W. Madsen, 1988, "Measurement of erosion-corrosion synergism with a slurry

wear test apparatus," Wear, vol. 123, pp. 127-142.
Co
]36[ Q. Yang, D. Seo, L. Zhao, and X. Zeng, 2004, "Erosion resistance performance of
ot
magnetron sputtering deposited TiAlN coatings," Surface and Coatings Technology, vol.
tN
188, pp. 168-173.
ip
]37[ B. Xiao, J. Xing, J. Feng, Y. Li, C. Zhou, W. Su, et al., 2008, "Theoretical study on the
sc
r
stability and mechanical property of Cr7C3," Physica B: Condensed Matter, vol. 403, pp.
Ma
nu
2273-2281.
]38[ A. V. Levy, 1988, "The erosion-corrosion behavior of protective coatings," Surface
Ac
ce
pt
ed
and Coatings technology, vol. 36, pp. 387-406.
18

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
Figure Captions List

Fig. 1
Schematic of erosion-corrosion test rig: (1) pump, (2) frequency inverter,
ite
d
(3) flow-controlled valve, (4) slurry container, (5) counter electrode, (6)
nozzle, (7) reference electrode, (8) holder, (9) sample, (10) potentiostat
Fig. 2
py
ed
and (11) PC.
(a) Cross section of Cr7C3 coating and (b) Micro-hardness profile of
XRD pattern of chromium carbide coating (Cr7C3) in molten salt bath
ot
Fig. 3
Co
chromized sample after TRD treatment at 1050oC for 12 hours
tN
containing 85 wt.% borax 15 wt.% low carbon Ferro chromium at
Mass loss of uncoated and coated samples of test in at various flow
sc
r
Fig. 4
ip
1050oC for 12 hours.
Fig. 5
Ma
nu
velocity at impact angle of 90.
Potentiodynamic polarization curve of Cr7C3-coated and uncoated

specimens under erosion-corrosion condition at 5 m s-1 and impact angle
Mass loss of uncoated and Cr7C3 coated samples at various impact angle
pt
Fig. 6
ed
of 90
Potentiodynamic polarization curve of uncoated and coated specimens
Ac
Fig. 7
ce
at 5 m s-1 flow velocity.
at impact velocity of 5 m s-1 and at 45 .
Fig. 8
SEM micrograph of Cr7C3 coating surface after impingement at normal
19

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
impact and at impact velocity (a) 6 m.s-1 and (b) 7.5 m.s-1.
Fig. 9
SEM micrograph of Cr7C3 coating surface after impingement at 5 m. s-1
Ac
ce
pt
ed
Ma
nu
sc
r
ip
tN
ot
Co
py
ed
ite
d
impact velocity and at impact angle of (a) 90o and (b) 60o.
20

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
Information Regarding Figures and Tables

3
11
ite
d
6
5
8
4
9
py
ed
10
Ac
ce
pt
ed
Ma
nu
sc
r
ip
tN
Fig 1.
ot
Co
21

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
Carbide layer
ite
d
Diffusion layer
py
ed
Substrate
Ac
ce
pt
ed
Ma
nu
sc
r
ip
tN
Fig. 2
ot
Co
50 m
22
Ac
ce
pt
ed
Ma
nu
sc
r
ip
tN
Fig. 3
ot
Co
py
ed
ite
d

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
23
Ac
ce
pt
ed
Ma
nu
sc
r
ip
tN
Fig. 4
ot
Co
py
ed
ite
d

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
24
ip
tN
ot
Co
py
ed
ite
d

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
Ac
ce
pt
ed
Ma
nu
sc
r
Fig. 5
25
Ac
ce
pt
ed
Ma
nu
sc
r
ip
tN
Fig. 6
ot
Co
py
ed
ite
d

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
26
ip
tN
ot
Co
py
ed
ite
d

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
Ac
ce
pt
ed
Ma
nu
sc
r
Fig. 7
27
ot
Co
Cracks
py
ed
ite
d

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
Fig. 8
Ac
ce
pt
ed
Ma
nu
sc
r
ip
tN
Embedded particle
28

ASME
Journal
of Tribology
ite
d
Cracks
py
ed
Flake
Ac
ce
pt
ed
Ma
nu
sc
r
ip
tN
Fig. 9
ot
Co
Internal cracks
29

Effect of Flow Velocity and Impact Angle On Erosion-Corrosion Behavior of Chromium Carbide Coating

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Effect of Flow Velocity and Impact Angle On Erosion-Corrosion Behavior of Chromium Carbide Coating

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Journal of Tribology.

Received April 09, 2016;

Effect of flow velocity and impact angle on

Corresponding author: Tel: (+98)-2177240540

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

Erosion-corrosion phenomenon is defined as the increase in the rate of

metal/alloy degradation caused by combined action of mechanical damage and

characteristic (including hardness, microstructure, strength, ductility and toughness),

passive film and results in high mass loss [4, 5].

Erosion-corrosion is one of the most common problems in engineering and

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

environment [15]. Chromium carbide coating is widely applied in the engineering

industry to improve surface properties of critical components, such as valves, pistons,

wear resistance, and excellent resistance to high-temperature oxidation and excellent

corrosion resistance in many environments [15-18]. Chromium carbide can be deposited

Chromium carbide coating presents an abrasive1 wear mechanism in corrosion condition

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

carried out to elucidate the dominant degradation mechanism of chromium carbide

the coated sample compared to uncoated one.

The cross-section of the coating was investigated by optical microscopy

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

was determined as:

flow velocity of 5 m s-1 to investigate the effect of impact angle.

Field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) (MIRA3-TESCAN) was

used in order to characterize the degradation mechanism.

Polarization curves were obtained using an EmStat3+ electrochemical

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

Fig. 4 shows the effect of flow velocity on erosion-corrosion behavior of the

former samples. Higher erosion-corrosion resistance of the coated samples is attributed

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

chemical stability of Cr7C3 which leads to a better erosion-corrosion resistance [23]. In

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

form platelets on surface, Therefore, the abrasion mechanism is replaced by plastic

deformation that may lead to material failure [33].

angle up to 60o. This is similar to brittle material behavior under erosion-corrosion

impact angle. In addition, the tough substrate enhanced erosion-corrosion resistance of

The potentiodynamic polarization curves of the uncoated and coated samples at

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

surface during erosion-corrosion test, controlled the resistance of chromium carbide to

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

and the subsurface.

mechanism for material removal.

stress component at impact angle of 60o results in directional propagation of subsurface

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

it suffers erosion-corrosion by cracking and or flake fragmentation mechanism and

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

Flow velocity, m. s-1

flow rate, m3 s-1

nozzle surface area, m2

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

metals," Tribocorrosion Passiv. Met. Coatings, Woodhead publishing, pp. 153-184.

WC-based MMCs in liquidsolid slurries," Wear, vol. 259, pp. 181-195.

corrosion behaviour of high-velocity oxy-fuel (HVOF) sprayed Fe-based amorphous

vol. 53, pp. 3177-3185.

]5[ Z. Zheng, Y. Zheng, W. Sun, and J. Wang, 2013, "Erosioncorrosion of HVOF-sprayed

Fe-based amorphous metallic coating under impingement by a sand-containing NaCl

]6[ I. Hussainova, I. Jasiuk, M .Sardela, and M. Antonov, 2009 "Micromechanical

vol. 267, pp. 152-159.

]7[ X. Hu, K. Alzawai, A. Gnanavelu, A. Neville, C. Wang, A. Crossland, et al., 2011,

Journal of Tribology. Received April 09, 2016;

corrosion performance on a range of stainless steels," Wear.

]10[ L. Giourntas, T. Hodgkiess, and A. Galloway, 2015 "Comparative study of erosion