Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract
Turbines and engines operating in a particulate flow environment experience erosion and performance deterioration. The industrial
approach for decreasing the erosion of machine components is to apply wear resistance coatings. This paper describes an experimental
investigation performed to compare the behavior of uncoated and coated Waspaloy eroded in a media composed of chromite particles. The
specimens were coated with titanium carbide (Tic) by a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) technique. The experimental program covered a
temperature range From ambient tempcmture to 538OC, the particle velocities ranging from 180 m s-’ to 305 m s-‘, and impingement angles
varying from 10” to 90”. The facility used for this work was a custom-made, high temperature erosion wind tunnel. The eroded surface
morphology was examined by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The results obtained depict the influence of the temperature. velocity
and the impingement angle on the erosion rate. In addition to this, further data show the variation of the coating erosion rate with the
quantity of chromite powder used. The erosion rate behavior of the TiC coating with respect to the impingement angles reveals a brittle
characteristic trend. The uncoated superalloy behaves as a ductile material because the maximum erosion is between 30’ and 4.5”. It is
found that the sample temperature has a significant effect on the mat&al erosion rate. The erosion resistance of the CVD coating increases
at elevated temperatures, whereas that of uncoated Waspaloy decreases. The results indicate that the erosion rate for both uncoated and
coated samples is proportional to the particlc impact velocity to the power n. This investigation showed that the tested CVD titanium
carbide coating provides very good erosion protection for Waspaloy in a particulate flow environmentat elevatedtemperatures. 0 1997
Elsevier Science S.A.
Ke~n,ords: Waspaloy; Chromite particles; Titanium carbide coating; Chemical vapor deposition (CVD); Impingement angle; Erosion rate
at high temperatures
of the TiC coating was largely due to chipping. On further material removal mechanism is based on flaking and
observation by SEM (Fig. 3), the eroded surface displayed ploughing. Similar surface morphology was observed by
no cracks or plastic deformation in the coating. This beha- Chinnadurai and Bahadur [ 111for Waspaloy when impacted
vior, we believe, is affected by the fine grained structure of with Sic particles. For uncoated Waspaloy, we obtained an
the coating and its good adhesion to the substrate. Similar erosion rate of one order of magnitude higher than that of
conclusions were made by Levy et al. concerning the low the coated alloy at the same conditions. It can hence be
erosion wear of CVD silicon carbide coating [ 121. concluded that the CVD titanium carbide coating provides
Variation of the erosion rate with the impact angle for very good erosion protection for the Waspaloy in particulate
uncoated Waspaloy is also shown in Fig. 2. The erosion flow environment.
rates of these specimens passes through a maximum close
to 45” impact angle. This pattern indicates the ductile nature 3.2. Temnpemtureeffect
of the substrate. The chromite particles, striking the
uncoated specimen, ‘cut’ metal chips along the surface The variation in the TiC coated and uncoated Waspaloy
and cause plastic deformation. This is shown in Fig. 3 for erosion rate with respect to the temperature of the particu-
a Waspaloy specimen at an impingement angle of 90”. The late flow at an impact angle of 90” is presented in Fig. 5. It
was noticed that the erosion rate of the uncoated substrates
7*oo
l”‘“O first decreased to 300°C and then increased as the tempera-
ture was increased to 538°C. According to Chinnadurai and
4.00 1 / I k I”*“”
P!
2
$j 3.00
E
0.
6
2.00
““““J”“‘l”l”““l”l
15 30 45 60 75
IMPINGEMENT ANGLE (degrees)
Rg. 2. Erosion rate variation of uncoated and coated Waspaloy with Fig. 4. Scanning electron micrograph of uncoated Waspaloy after erosion
impingement angle: T= 538”C, 16 = 305 m s-], 20 g chromite mass. at 90’ impingement angle: T = 538”C, tJP= 305 m s-l, 20 g chromite mass.
V. Shnnov et nl. / Surjluce and Coarings Technology 94-95 (1997) 64-69 67
1.20
1 .oo
$ 0.80
E
5 0.60 I-
5
m
& 0.40
0.20
100 400
VELOCIN (m/s)
Fig. 6. Scanning electron micrograph of TiC coating on Waspaloy after
erosion at 90” impingement angle: T = 53PC, VP = 180 m P’, 20 g chro- Fig. 8. Variation of the uncoated and coated Waspaloy erosion rate with
mite mass. velocity at 90” impingement angle: T = 538’C, 20 g chromite particles.
68 V. Shrorov et ui. / Surjircr and Courings Technology 94-95 (1997) 64-69
2.5
3.4. Pnrticlc rims effu oil the erosion rate
The cumulative mass erosion test result5 for the TiC coat-
ing on Waspaloy at 90” impingement angle are shown in F 2.0 h
Acknowledgements [S] W. Tabakoff and V. Shanov, Sut$ Conr. Technol., 76/77 (1995)
15.
[9] V. Shanov and W. Tabakoff, Eruion Resisrance OJ’ Coatirzgs /or
This research was sponsored by NationaI Science Foun- Meral Prorecrion at E!evared Temperatures, presented at the Inter-
dation, Washington, DC, Grant INT-9204963.-Dr. V, Sha- national Conference on Metallurgical Coatings and Thin Films, April
nov would like to thank the Fulbright Foreign Scholarship 22-26, 1996, San Diego, CA.
Board for financial support. The authors thank Dr. J. Lian [lo] J.P. Frick, Wo’oidman’s Engecring Alloys, 7th edn., ASM International
for performing the SEM work. Materials Park, Ohio, 1990, p. 1318.
[l l] S. Chinnadurai and S. Baludur, I\‘eu, 186/187 (1995) 299.
[12] V. Shanov, W. Tabakoff and M. Metwally, Sur[i: Coat. Technoi., 54/
55 (1992) 25.
References [ 131 V. Shanov, W. Tabakoff and A. Hamed, Sur$ Coat. Technol., 68/69
(1994) 92.
111 M.G. HocAking,V. Vasantasree and P.S. Sidky, Memiiic and Ceramic [14] W. Tabakoff and and T. Wakeman, Test Facility for Marerial Ero-
Coating Prodrtcrioiz, High Temperature Properties and Applications, sion ar High Temperarure, ASME Special Publication, 664 (1979) p.
Longman Scientific and Technical, UK, 1989, p. 349. 123.
:2] P.A. Dearney and E.M. Rent, Met&- Technology, February, Vol. 9. 1151 W. Tabakoff, M. Metwally and A. Hamed, J. Eng. Gas Turbirze
The Metal Society, 1989. Pobcer, ZZ7(Ij (1995) 146.
[3] J. Qureshi and W. Tabakoff, Su$ Gout. Techrrol., 33 (1988) 433. [16] A. Levy. D. Boone, A. Davis and E. Scholz, in J.E. Field and N.S.
[4] W. Tabakoff. Srtr$ Coat. Technol., 39/40 (1989) 97. Corney (eds.), Proc. 6th Itzi. Conf: on Erosion by Liquid and Solid
[5] P.J. Burnet and D.S. Rickerby, J. Muter. Sci., 23 (1988) 2429. Impacr. Cavendish Laboratog, Cambridge, 1983 p. 46.
161 B. Jonsson, L. Akre, S. Johansson and S. Hogmark, Thin Solid Films, [17] N. Gat and W. Tabakoff, American Society for Testing and Materi-
137 j19S6j 65. als, 1. Tes?iizg Evaluation, 8j4) (1980) 177.
171 P. Walsh and W. Tabakoff, Adv. Beam Turbine Tech&. Poiver [18] T. Wakeman and W. Tabakoff, J. Aircraff, J6(12) (1978) 828.
Generation, 10 (1990) 1.